A. Apollonius Cn. Caesari sal.

> The priestly colleges issued responsa to questions asked of them, in

the form of decreta. So much is clear. <

I think it would be better to say that the colleges issued responsa which can also (unhelpfully) be called decreta. To say that they were issued "in the form of decreta" is to say very little because a decretum has no particular form. Responsa were given in the form of responsa. The term "decretum" is really best avoided because it is so imprecise.

> Would it be correct to say

that:

>
> a) decreta had the authority, but not the force, of law

> b) decreta were not enforced by pontiffs, but by magistrates

<

I don't understand what you mean by "the authority... of law". A responsum by a public priest had the authority of that priest; a responsum issued by several priests had the authority of those priests. They were authoritative statements of the relevant sacral rules. Nothing could be more authoritative: if you wanted to know what the sacral rule on a certain point was, and you found a relevant responsum, then that was the answer.

On the other hand they were not legally binding because they were not orders. When we say that something is legally binding we mean that it forces someone to do, or refrain from doing, something. A responsum cannot do this because it does not try to do this. It just states a fact, such as "if a building has been consecrated without the authority of a lex or plebiscitum then it can be restored without sacrilege". Statements like that contain no instructions and therefore cannot be obeyed or disobeyed: one cannot take a person to court for failing to comply with a responsum because a responsum is incapable of being complied with or not complied with. So in that sense a responsum really has no legal content at all.

Equally it is not entirely helpful to talk about responsa being "enforced", because again things which are "enforced" are usually instructions, and responsa were not instructions. However, it is true that if there was any action which should or might be taken as the result of a responsum, it was generally a magistrate who took that action.

I don't know whether the above constitutes an answer "yes" or an answer "no" to your question, but I hope you'll be able to work it out! :)

> To take the often cited case of Cicero's house, the question was

asked of the pontiffs, they replied, but the Senate enforced the
consequences of their decision - i.e. the question of restitution.
<

The pontifices said that if a building were consecrated without the authority of a lex or prebiscitum then it could be restored without sacrilege. The senate then said that Cicero's house had been consecrated without the authority of a lex or plebiscitum and could therefore be restored without sacrilege; and it went on to decide that the house should be restored. The relevant magistrates then restored the house to Cicero (in practice what probably happened is simply that they did not prevent Cicero from re-occupying the house).


Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

A. Apollonius Cn. Equitio sal.

> I've also used the flights of birds as "yes/no" indicators. Establish a

templum in the sky facing east, and wait for the first bird to fly into
it. A bird from the north is a yes, one from the south a no.
<

We should say, however, that according to ancient Roman augural rules a valid templum for the taking of public auspices could only be established by an augur. I'm not aware that any responsum has ever been given on the subject in Nova Roma, but chapter VI.B.2.b.1 of the lex constitutiva seems to suggest that the same is true in Nova Roma. So any auspices taken in a templum created by a magistrate who is not an augur will probably not amount to valid public auspices.





___________________________________________________________
Now you can scan emails quickly with a reading pane. Get the new Yahoo! Mail. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html

A. Apollonius Cn. Caesari sal.

I cannot for the life of me see how the phrase "[The augures shall] oversee and advise the magistrate (auspex) with jus auspicium when he
takes the auguries upon calling a comitia to assemble, upon taking
office as a magistrate, at the erection of a temple, and on other
occasions" imposes any duty on anyone other than the augures.

This is a matter of simple English. As I said before, the statement "The Polish authorities must let me in when I go to Poland" does not impose upon me a duty to go to Poland.

The fact that the sentence goes on to list various specific occasions when auspices might be taken is irrelevant. The statement "The Polish authorities must let me in when I go to Poland two days after the birth of my first daughter" does not impose upon me a duty to go to Poland two days after the birth of my first daughter.

As far as I can see you are worrying yourself over nothing at all. No sensible reading of these proposals would lead anyone to imagine that magistrates are obliged to take the auspices in person. Please step back from your assumptions and just read the sentence as though it were a sentence in a newspaper or a children's book. It cannot plausibly be read to mean that magistrates must take the auspices on the occasions mentioned. All it says, and all it means, is that, when they do, the augures must oversee and advise them.

I can see no evidence whatsoever that these proposals are intended to, or would, change the current situation. The only people who are suggesting that they *would* have that effect are people who *don't want* them to have that effect. If the only people who interpret them in that way are the very same people who dislike that interpretation, then that interpretation will never be implemented. Why? Because if the relevant text falls to be interpreted by someone who reads them in the sensible way, then that person will implement the sensible interpretation; and if the relevant text falls to be interpreted by someone who believes but dislikes your interpretation, then that person will not wish to implement that interpretation and will find another one, such as the one which makes sense in the first place.

This whole discussion is a red herring of elephantine, nay, mammothian size.



Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

A. Apollonius C. Equitio sal.

> My concern was that there

is no provision for allowing someone to ask someone else to perform

these rites and ceremonies for them - in fact, that possibility is
closed firmly and completely in a most remarkable and un-Nova Roman
way! But A. Cordus and C. Metellus make it clear that this is, in

fact, one of the reform's primary intents. They are both extremely
polite in their expression of this intent, but it amounts to "if they
can't do it they don't belong here."
<

Amice, you have evidently not read what I and Q. Metellus wrote with great care. The first half of my message was entirely devoted to explaining that the reform does *not* change the current situation. I cannot see how that can possibly be used as evidence that the reform is *intended* to change the current situation. Metellus' message, on the other hand, contained not the slightest reference to the actual wording of the proposals (which he was not, as far as I know, involved in drafting), so they provide no evidence at all about what the proposals would do or are intended to do.

I discussed the early drafts very extensively with Cn. Salvius, and I can assure that neither he nor I at any stage even considered the possibility of including any requirement for magistrates to take the auspices in person. The whole and sole purpose of the proposals, as far as we were concerned, was and remains to put in place and clear and historical framework which tells *priests* what they are expected to do and how. It had absolutely nothing to do with the obligations of magistrates. I am absolutely certain that if Cn. Salvius had thought there was any danger of this absurd misinterpretation, he would have taken careful steps to avoid it. But neither of us thought of it, because we assumed that anyone trying to interpret the words would use the normal rules of the English language.


Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

A. Apollonius Cn. Caesari C. Equitioque sal.

In my last two messages I responded to you separately in order to try to get you to understand that the wording which you are both so exercised about simply cannot be interpreted in the way you dislike so much. In this message I simply want to make a few very short comments about the more general discussion of whether magistrates should be obliged to take auspices in person or not.

As far as I can see this is simply another batch of worrying about a non-existent problem. So far we have heard from three Christians in this discussion. One, you yourself Cato amice, would have no problem with taking the auspices in person. The second, Cn. Equitius, actually *has* taken the auspices in person. The third, T. Sergius, already excludes himself from public office because he does not believe that Christians should hold public office at all. We have heard *no-one* say that he would feel unable to take office if it meant taking the auspices in person.

Cato, how many times have you said in this forum - quite correctly - that the Romans did not worry about problems until they actually occurred? Please apply the same principle here. We have no evidence whatsoever that there is anyone in Nova Roma who wants to hold public office but would feel unable to do so if it involved taking the auspices in person. In fact all the evidence points in completely the opposite firection.

Nor am I in the least bit persuaded by your argument, Caesar amice, that such a change would be going back on some promise made to people when they joined. This argument could be put forward to oppose any alteration whatsoever! The fact is that when someone joins Nova Roma he accepts not only the set of rules which exist at the time he joins but *also* the fact that those rules may be changed in the future. To compensate him for this uncertainty, he is given a vote which he can use to prevent any changes he dislikes, as well as a public forum in which he can speak in opposition to any changes he dislikes.

Now, both of you, please do not try to pluck my heart-strings with any more sob-stories about imaginary Christians who are exactly the sort of people Nova Roma needs in office and whom I am nonetheless seeking to exclude. I do not believe that they exist. When I look for Christians who are exactly the sort of people I want to see in office, I find people like Cato and Marinus who would not be excluded by such a rule. I do not find any who would be excluded. Until you find me one, I am simply not prepared to believe that there are any.

If the conversation about the meaning of the word "when" is a red herring the size of a mammoth, this conversation is a red herring the size of a great big pile of mammoths in a bucket marked "Mammoths size XXL and upwards, buy one get one free".



Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

A. Apollonius L. Junio sal.

Many congratulations! I'm sure you have a great future here. :)



Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

A. Apollonius Q. Suetonio sal.

I'm not aware of any Jewish magistrates in the old republic. It's pretty unlikely since until the late republic Judaea wasn't really part of the Roman world. Also back in those days there wasn't much of a Jewish diaspora: that really started in the principate with Titus and Vespasian and later with Hadrian. So in republican times there was very little overlap between the Jewish nation and the public institutions of the Roman republic.



Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

SALVE !

My thanks, Consul Modianus for your support. I understand this year
from your work that NR still have great resources to grow up. I saw
your effort to unite the magistrates and to find a common way to
resolve the problems. This is a wonderful thing and I will take it
as an exemple in my future activities, whatever they are.

VALE BENE,
IVL SABINVS



--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "David Kling (Modianus)"
<tau.athanasios@...> wrote:

>
> Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus S.P.D.
>
> Scholastica, a candidate for Praetor, has been active in Nova Roma
> behind the scenes as a rogatrix, scribe, accensus, interpreter, and
> within two sodalitates. Her involvement and activity is a

testament

> to her dedication. Many magistrates are indebted to her for her
> skills in Latin translation. Nova Roma has a hidden treasure in
> Scholastica and it is about time that she be honored for the

dedicated

> and able person she is.
>
> Another candidate for Praetor that I support is T. Iulius

Sabinus. I

> have watched his administration of the Ludi in his role as Curule
> Aedile and his dedication is impressive. I believe a team of
> Scholastica & Sabinus would be a good team.
>
> Both of these candidates have my support.
>
> Valete:
>
> Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
> Consul
>

A. Apollonius M. Valerio sal.

> I am not sure of the Republican history on further divisions in the provinces to create a second level on a local area. <

A provincial governor can essentially sub-divide his province in whatever way he finds helpful. In ancient times it was normal to use whatever sub-divisions already existed before the Romans arrived. In Britain, which was a tribal society, local government was based on the old tribes. In Greece, which was an urban society, local government was based on the old city-states. For modern provinces with no history of Roman occupation, I would suggest using whatever local sub-divisions are normal - in the U.S. this would probably be states and then counties or whatever the next thing below a state is.

I have heard some people in Nova Roma suggest recently that the provinces themselves should be made smaller because some of them are too big for people to conveniently get from one side to the other. This idea is utterly daft. A Roman province is not supposed to be an area small enough for all its inhabitants to be able to meet up for dinner. In Roman times it would have taken days or even weeks to travel from one end of a province to the other. If a province is too big for all its inhabitants to get together for dinner, then that's a very good reason for them to have several different dinner-parties in different parts of the province. It is not a reason to make the province smaller.


Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

A. Apollonius C. Equitio sal.

> Let's divide the questions brought up by the proposed reform of the

religio into the two basic areas of concern:

>
> 1. the question of pontifical legislative authority, and


>
> 2. the question of the requirement that magistrates perform whatever

"rites and ceremonies" might be "passed into law".
<

I already did that. Number 1 is in a thread called "de jure pontificio". Number 2 is in a thread called "de jure auspicio".

Now, on to the meat and potatoes:

> Corde, while we wait for an authoritative interpretation of the Greek

of Dionysius, could you in the meantime provide the explanation -
based on historic practice - that would justify the removal of the
current pontifical authority to make and adjudicate sacral law? Sort
of a bullet-point series of historic sources and practices that would
serve as a foundation for this interpretation?
<

The proposal would not exactly remove "the current pontifical authority to make and adjudicate sacral law". It would remove the power of the collegium pontificum to make what are effectively super-leges on whatever subject they consider "relevant" to religio Romana. This consists of three changes.

First, the removal of the super-legal status of pontifical responsa or decreta. This has no historical basis whatsoever. There is not a single instance in republican history of a priestly responsum overruling a lex. It's really that simple. I hope there's no need to cite primary sources for it. If anyone can find a primary source which suggests that a responsum *could* overrule a lex, we'll discuss it.

Secondly, the removal of formal legislative initative from the collegia. Currently the collegia can make these super-leges whenever they want to. If the collegium pontificum has the bright idea of criminalizing free expression, it can do it. Historically priests could only give responsa in reply to questions from magistrates or others. This should mean that we get responsa on issues which we actually need responsa about, and not about anything else. One may say that this change would be purely formal because it will never be hard for the pontifices to find somebody to ask them whatever question they want to answer. Maybe, but in this case there is no reason to object to this change.


Thirdly, the clarification of the scope of responsa. Currently the collegium pontificum can legislate on any matter which is "relevant to the religio Romana". This covers not only the sacra publica but the private religious practices of any person or group. Also, since just about everything in the republic has some sort of religious significance, it means that the pontifices can effectively legislate on anything at all. The proposals clarify the remit of responsa, and in addition the change of initiative would mean that responsa would only be issued on subjects which magistrates considered were particularly suitable for the pontifices to give their opinion about.

Sources for the historical accuracy of the above statements can be found by starting with one or more of the following modern authorities and following the footnotes to the primary sources:

Watson, "The State, Law And Religion", esp. chapter 1;
North, "Religion In Republican Rome" (chapter 12 in the Cambridge Ancient History vol. 7 part 2), esp. section 2;
Rasmussen, "Public Portents In Republican Rome", esp. chapter 2 sections 1, 3, and 4.

Some good illustrations of how the system worked are:

Cicero, de domo suo;
Cicero, de natura deorum 2.10-1;
Plutarch, Marcellus 5;
Granius Licinianus 28.24.

And here is an interesting example of a serious religious crisis being handled without the formal involvement of any priestly collegia at all:

Livy 39.13-19.

I hope that's enough to be going on with. I really do suggest, though, that it would be easier for both of us if you could identify specific facts which you want sources for, rather than just asking me for sources for the whole thing.







___________________________________________________________
All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine
http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html

A. Apollonius M. Octavio sal.

> I have to disagree with you there. Flavius Vedius Germanicus gave us

excellent laws. Some of them needed a bit of tweaking; no complex
system is 100% perfect on the first try. Many "had to" be revised only
because successive consuls wanted to put their own name on everything -
I pointed out about a month ago how one recent law was just a line-by-line
paraphrasing of one of Vedius's laws, that added only one extra line
to it; and that it now has another consul's name on it, though it was 90%
Vedius's work.
<

For better or worse, this is the way Roman legislation works. In ancient times, if a magistrate wanted to change part of an existing lex, he proposed a new lex which contained the entire text of the existing lex, with the relevant bits changed. And the whole thing would then be named after the magistrate who proposed the changes. Perhaps unfair, but there we go.

The only alternative is what has sometimes been done in Nova Roma, which is to propose a new lex saying "the following bits of that other lex are changed in the following way, and the rest stays the same". That makes life harder for everyone, because it means that in order to know what the law is on that point you have to look up both the original lex and the amending lex. I know you would like all legislation to be easily comprehensible, so perhaps you'll have some sympathy with this.

Of course if a magistrate proposes to re-enact an existing lex with only a tiny alteration, one may perhaps ask whether it's worth proposing at all. But if it is, then there is really no option but to do it that way.



Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

M. Hortensia Quiritibus spd;

L. Arminius Faustus from Provincia Brasilia has been my
good friend & guide in all things Roman for over 2 years. He's
devoted to Nova Roma, been tribune, praetor, active in Provincia
Brasilia.
And he is also keen to return us to the republican model, a
devoted cultor deorum in the generous tradition of respecting all. A
kind person always willing to share his learning & help me be a
better Roman!

> Right now he's in Gallia & posted here to find fellow Nova

Romans, that's the kind of Consul we need. Devoted to the res
publica & knowledgable.

As for M. Moravius Piscinus Horatianus, flamen Carmentalis, I
know him as he gave the course on the religio romana at Academia
Thules! He helped me write, as my class project, a wonderful ritual
to Magna Mater.
This is just the kind of Consul we need, one who is actively
helping cives, sharing his knowledge, always posting on the religio
board, a giver not a fighter. Another Latin speaker like Faustus.

FAUSTUS & PISCINUS: These 2 men will work together as Consules as
they both share the same vision: A more Roman Nova Roma!
bene valete in pacem deorum
Marca Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebis
producer "Vox Romana" podcast

> Consul is an important Magistrate within Nova Roma. I encourage
> everyone to consider how important this office is and how

important it

> is to consider who is elected. This is why I endorse the following
> citizens: L. Arminius Faustus and M. Moravius Piscinus.
>
> I worked with Faustus when he and I were tribunes back in 2003. He
> and I didn't agree on everything, and there were often heated
> discussions on the tribune list. However, I believe him to be
> unselfishly dedicated to Nova Roma and I believe he would labor for
> the best interest of Nova Roma and that he would display diplomacy

and

> fairness.
>
> I have worked with M. Moravius Piscinus this year in his capacity

as

> tribune, as well as in the Collegium Pontificum in his capacity as

a

> Flamen. He is extremely knowledgeable on matters Roman and his
> diplomatic nature and willingness to contribute to Nova Roma will

be a

> blessing.
>
> Valete:
>
> Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
> Consul
>

A. Apollonius omnibus sal.

A bit of history may help here. What we have in Nova Roma called a "nota" is a sort of compendium of a number of things which in the old republic were quite separate. Cn. Caesar has alluded to this.

The censores were elected every five years or so. Unlike most magistrates, they did not have a general, ongoing duty which they performed constantly from the time when they entered office to the time when they left it. Rather, they had a specific set of tasks to complete, and as soon as they had completed them they stepped down.

One of those tasks was the lectio senatus (revision of the list of senatores). In doing this, they could remove senatores whom they considered guilty of reprehensible conduct. It helps to imagine the physical process. They literally had a big list of names. To remove a senator, they put a mark (nota) against his name. There was a very strong custom requiring the censores to explain why they had done this, and sometimes they even gave the senator concerned a chance to argue his case to them before they made a decision.

Another of their tasks was the probatio equitum (examination of the equites). The equites with the public horse (i.e. those who, as a mark of honour, had their horse paid for by the state) paraded in front of the censores. If the censores thought that an eques had behaved reprehensibly, they could order him to sell his horse, thus depriving him of the public horse.

Another was the census itself. Every citizen presented himself to the censores. They made a note of his tribe and of the value of his total wealth. If they thought a citizen had behaved reprehensibly, they could punish him in several ways. One was to write him down as having far more property than he really had, thus making him liable for more tax than he really ought to be paying. Another was to move him out of his tribe. It's not entirely clear whether they would move him to one of the urban tribes, or to the group of aerarii, or whether these two things were the same. Either way, it had the effect either of totally depriving him of the vote or else of weakening the power of his vote a great deal. It also made him infamis, meaning that he could not stand for office, act as a legal witness, and various other things.

Nova Roma has conflated the first and the last of these into the term "nota", which has caused some confusion. The proposed amendments seek to solve some of the confusion, though they fail to remove the actual cause of the confusion, which is the inclusion of two entirely separate things under a single heading. There is in fact no need for either of these things to be specified in the lex constitutiva at all. The power to remove a senator from the senate is included in the censores' power to revise the list of senatores. The power to bar a person from voting or standing for office is included in their power to conduct the census. Neither of them is a separate, free-standing power.

Another reason, I think, why these proposals are being brought forward now, is that some people have suggested that a "nota" in our current system cannot deprive a citizen of the right to stand for office. This idea is simply absurd, and is rightly but unnecessarily rejected by the proposals. The right to stand for office and the right to vote are part of the same right. One cannot be deprived of one without being deprived of both.

The above is not intended to persuade you to vote for the proposals or to vote against them. Please draw your own conclusions.



Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Salve,Publius Livius Triarius,Call me stupid .Or maybe I am reading you wrong.Either way I feel a little more elaboration of your premise is due.If you are calling me insincere in my profession of faith in the Religeo Romana as being akin to a sci fi fan,than you are laboring under a false premise.As far as time and money as you say is concerned many of us can spend it elsewhere.If you do not respect my faith as anything but sincere then you in my opinion are nothing more than a religeous bigot.Which is about as equal to a racial one in my book.If my preception is incorrect I will also gladly apologize to you in public.I hope that will be the case in this situation.Vale,Appius Galerius Aurelianus.

dicconf <dicconf@...> wrote:

On Mon, 30 Oct 2006, Maior wrote:

> M. Hortensia App. Claudio spd;
> where have you been? There are more pagans & witches
> in the U.S than Episcopalians. Many people come to Nova Roma for
> lots of reasons, just behave like Cicero; with decorum and respect
> for tradition, and you'll be fine.

"Throw a rock and you'll hit a pagan or wiccan. He'll throw it right
back, but at least you've found him."

The attitude of many of us seems to be that which Walt Willis recommended
for SF fans: Since we are investing time, money and thought in this, let
us act as if we were sincere and our activities were worthwhile.

-- Publius Livius Triarius






---------------------------------
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salve Marinus,

Thank you! :-) I'll do that.

Vale,

F. Martiana

On 10/30/06, Gnaeus Equitius Marinus <gawne@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Fausta Martiana,
>
> Just send the correct information to webmaster@...<webmaster%40novaroma.org>(webmaster
> at novaroma dot org) or to the censors. We'll fix it.
>
> Vale,
>
> -- Marinus
>
> Fausta Martiana Gangalia Minervalis wrote:
>
> > Salvete,
> >
> > I looked up my information in the Album Civium, and saw that I need to
> make
> > a correction to my "personal website".
>
>



--
Fausta Martiana Gangalia Minervalis

"Leve fit, quod bene fertur, onus."
(The burden which is borne well becomes light) - Ovid

My Yahoo page
http://360.yahoo.com/minervalis_barnowl


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Cato A. Cordo sal.

Salve Corde.

OK, I think you have given me something to chew on.

Now, let me point out that the reason there has been such
consternation about the proposed reform was this:

"d. To oversee and advise the magistrate (auspex) with jus auspicium
when he takes the auguries upon calling a comitia to assemble, upon
taking office as a magistrate, at the erection of a temple, and on
other occasions, seeing that the rite was done correctly and that
nothing might invalidate it. They shall not take the auspices
themselves, nor determine how the signs should finally be read."

This seems to say that the Collegium Augurum would be responsible for
advising magistrates on the taking of auspices. There was an
assumption that the magistrate in question would ask a member of the
Collegium Augurum what was up auspices-wise and then would be required
to take his own auspices. This latterassumption breing made because
of the phrase

"VI.A. ...All magistrates and senators, as officers of the State,
shall be required to...perform the public religious rites and
ceremonies established by the law."

So to sort of round it all off, if the taking of auspices is a rite or
ceremony established by the law, then every magistrate who is required
to take those auspices would be required to do it themselves, not have
them taken by proxy. Am I reading this incorrectly?

Vale bene,

Cato

Salvete Corde, Marine, et omnes

Templum is a general term for an area that is "set off" from
surrounding land by taking auspices, and temporarily devoted to a
particular purpose. There were all kinds of templa, depending on
their intended purpose. You should not confuse all of them as being
the same.

Cordus' comment is not quite true. Anyone can take auspicia and thus
would erect the celestial templum in which to observe the auspices.
Anyone taking auspicia would also necessarily erect the terrestrial
templum in which auspicia were performed. Augures were not required
for those kind of templa. In the case of a magistrate acting as an
auspex, he would be assisted by public augures to ensure that the
ritual was performed correctly, but he would be the one to actually
erect the terrestrial and celestial templa. Augures were not
required, and in fact did not take the augurium publica. There were
two (possibly three) auguracula located inside the pomerium that had
already been established as templa for the magistrates to take the
auguria publica. The one most used was on the Arx beside where Titus
Tatius had his home. The other was on the Quirinale Hill, presumably
also first established by Titus Tatius. Some other instances where
we hear about magistrates taking the auspices is the one case with
Consul Tiberius Gracchus in order to hold elections. That was a
temporary templum, erected in the garden of Scipio Africanus, and it
just happened that Consul Gracchus was also a public augur. His son,
Tiberius Gracchus, the beloved Tribunus Plebis, also is mentioned
taking auspices, at his home because of the significance of the house
of a Tribunus Plebis, and he, too, just happened to be a public
augur. But nothing in those stories, or in others concerning
auspicia is there any mention of a requirement that augures perform
the auspicium. In a couple of stories the magistrate acts as the
auspex, and thus must necessarily have been the one to erect both
templa, but no mention is given in those cases that the respective
magistrates were also augures.

Where the services of augures were required to erect templa were in
two other related cases. Anything that was struck by lightning had
to be properly dealt with. The tree, if that was the case, the soil,
a person or animal, whatever was struck, had to be buried in a
special way. The round mound under which such articles were buried
was called a puteal, and it had to be marked off by an augur who was
called specifically in to perform the ritual in order to determine
the boundaries of this little shrine. I think it is Flores, in
describing some of the shrines on a private estate, who mentions one
of these puteals. We can imagine that there might have been quite a
few puteals scatered over the countryside. The augur who was called
in to perform the rite was not necessarily a public augur. All
Romans took auspicia, even women are known to have, and some private
citizens, like Attus Naevius might gain a reputation as especially
knowledgeable or skilled as an augur, and thus could be called upon
to act as an augur in private situations.

The other case, where public augures would have been the ones
required to erect the templum, was where a public area was being
marked off for a special use. Usually this was for a shrine, of
which there were different types. Although not all of these public
templa were converted into shrines; the Curia being most noted. The
augur *sanctified* the area by taking the auspices to determine the
boundaries of the shrine, and then directed the marking off of those
boundaries. If the intended use of the templum was to erect an
edifice, what we call a temple (aedes), then further steps were
required to make the site sacred - first the location had to be
within the pomerium, the project of erecting the edifice had to be
voted on by a comitia, and then the pontifices had to perform the
consecratio. In that case only were public augures required to erect
the templum, because it was a public project. However such projects
had two commisioner charged with overseeing the work and dedication
of the edifice, and it may have been that they served as auspices,
and thus might have been called augures when theat particular part of
the conversion process took place. Other kinds of shrines like a
fanum would not necessarily have been consecrated, although some
probably were, but would had to have been sanctified by public
augures if they were public shrines, or at least by private augures
for a private fanum even if intended for public use.

The title of augur probaby referred to a functional role in some
rites. And as anyone might perfom auspicia, anyone might be called
an augur I suppose. But auspex it the title of one who performs the
ritual and would be the more technical term in that case. Augur
generally carries a connotation of a person who had studied the art
of auspicia. So in a family, one uncle might be considered an augur
in that family, and he might have been called upon to advise others
as an augur. We know that every family kept their own books on
augury and that these did not always follw the same procedures or use
the same signs as were used in public auspicia. Those who kept such
family books and studied them were private augures. But to say an
augur was required to erect a templum is a little misleading, and to
confuse the term with only those augures who were officially
recognized as public priests in the Collegium Augurum, in all
situations, in not correct.

Valete optime
M Moravius Piscinus


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "A. Apollonius Cordus"
<a_apollonius_cordus@...> wrote:

>
>
> A. Apollonius Cn. Equitio sal.
>
> > I've also used the flights of birds as "yes/no" indicators.

Establish a

> templum in the sky facing east, and wait for the first bird to fly

into

> it. A bird from the north is a yes, one from the south a no.
> <
>
> We should say, however, that according to ancient Roman augural

rules a valid templum for the taking of public auspices could only be
established by an augur. I'm not aware that any responsum has ever
been given on the subject in Nova Roma, but chapter VI.B.2.b.1 of the
lex constitutiva seems to suggest that the same is true in Nova
Roma. So any auspices taken in a templum created by a magistrate who
is not an augur will probably not amount to valid public auspices.

>
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> Now you can scan emails quickly with a reading pane. Get the new

Yahoo! Mail. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html

>

A. Apollonius omnibus sal.

I'm going to write one more message today, then I'm going to do my best to say very little for the next week or so. That should come as some relief. :)

The vote for censor is uncontested, so I'll not say much about it. I think C. Buteo is a good man and will do his best to be a good censor. I have to confess that I've been a little disappointed with some of the things he's done as consul, but I think he's seen that some of them didn't work out very well, and I hope that as censor he will take a moment before making big decisions to find out about the Roman way to do whatever he's thinking of doing.

It's pretty easy for me to decide who to vote for to be consul. It's easy because I always try, wherever possible, to vote for the candidates who are best qualified according to the ancient cursus honorum. That means that when I'm looking for a consul, I choose people who have been praetor. There are two of those here: Ti. Galerius and L. Arminius. The decision is made all the easier by the fact that, apart from being properly qualified, they are both excellent fellows and excellent magistrates; and I'm proud to say that they're also friends of mine. :) They would make a complementary pair, too. Ti. Galerius is eminently practical, and has put forward a very impressive set of concrete proposals which he would like to carry forward in office. He has not just voiced vague hopes and dreams but shown a clear intention to execute specific policies in specific ways. L. Arminius, meanwhile, is one of our most Roman Romans, and would bring stability and Romanitas to the republic simply by standing at the tiller and steering a steady course.

The other two consular candidates have their merits: M. Moravius will be a very good consul one day, but I do think he should be praetor first, like any good Roman. I was not inclined to think very much of Fl. Vedius before the contest started, but his early campaign-speeches impressed me with their pragmatism; however, his more recent messages have not shown him in a very pleasant light, and he has in any case been consul twice already: it's time for him to step aside from elected office, at least for a good many years, and exert his influence in the senate.

What I said above about being properly qualified is especially relevant in the contest for the praetura. Nova Roma has witnessed some startling acts of defiance of the ancient cursus before, but never one so startling or so objectionable as A. Tullia's decision to run for praetrix - the second most powerful office of state - without having held any junior magistracy at all. The vigintisexviri, let us be clear, were not regarded as true magistrates in the ancient republic, and certainly did not qualify automatically for higher office. Nobody held any higher magistracies without being praetor. It's true that some people have in recent years become praetor without being quaestor, but they at least have been able to show past terms as aedilis or tribunus, or even both. For someone to run for praetor without having held any office apart from vigintisexvir is simply abominable.

This may seem to some of you an excessively stern reaction. After all, to someone who's not familiar with Roman constitutional rules it's not at all obvious that running for praetor without holding any lower magistracy is a big deal. Fair enough. It's not something you'd expect everyone to know. So I wrote to A. Tullia to explain that it was a big deal and that if she valued the mos majorum she should withdraw and run for some lower office. And here's the problem: she didn't care. Not in the least. She knows that what she's doing is totally contrary to all Roman law and tradition, and as far as she's concerned that's not a problem. She said that it was all okay because the lex de whatever said she could run and some other people had told her she should run. I complained to you yesterday that too many of our magistrates are prepared to use any excuse to avoid doing what a Roman magistrate would do. Here, regrettably, is a perfect example.

Thank goodness, we have two good and qualified candidates. Both T. Julius and C. Equitius have served as quaestores and aediles curules, and have demonstrated both their dedication to the mos majorum and their practical ability in office. I have every confidence that they will do the job very well if they are elected; and if they are not elected, then I don't know what this place is coming to.

The remaining contests can be discussed briefly. I have nothing bad to say about any of the candidates for aediles curules, but I think I shall vote for Julia Caesar and T. Artoria: I recall being impressed by their work in various ludi, and I trust they will do more of the same. This year we have fewer candidates for quaestor than I can remember in any previous year, and I wonder whether that has anything to do with the fact that more and more people seem to get away with running for high office without being quaestor at all. Among the candidates I would, as usual, make special mention of Q. Metellus, a man worthy of his ancestors if ever I saw one. I also particularly look forward to seeing C. Curius' games as aedilis plebis; and the tribunician candidate who stands out to me is M. Curiatius, who's worked very energetically in the censorial office for the last couple of years and has also, by all accounts, been an effective governor of Hispania.



Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Salve Marce Horati,

Thank you for the illustrative information.

Vale,

-- Marinus

marcushoratius wrote:

> Salvete Corde, Marine, et omnes
>
> Templum is a general term for an area that is "set off" from
> surrounding land by taking auspices, and temporarily devoted to a
> particular purpose. There were all kinds of templa, depending on
> their intended purpose. You should not confuse all of them as being
> the same.

[...]

Salve!

The humorous part of this whole affair is the only reason why I began posting regarding this topic in the first place was to suggest that those who subscribe to other religions (Christians, Jews, etcÂ…) and feel uneasy about paganism should do exactly as you say. That one need not believe in what one does but simply go through the motions if asked so as not to cause grief and problems, these peoples real life beliefs need not be threatened by this and if they must, think of it as a re-enactment or roll-playing. My misconceptions and wording distracted from this message me thinks.

As for my own personal religious beliefs I am agnostic and place my belief in no higher power. I do believe this sentiment was echoed in ancient Rome and my beliefs are well summed up by Seneca:

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.”

These are Senecas wise words not mine and I do disagree with part of his sentiments (or implication) in that I do not feel those who worship are fools. They may simply be privy to information and experiences I am not and as religious belief is a very subjective and personal thing, I usually tread very lightly and my ignorance on the subject of modern pagans caused me to put my foot in my mouth. Again to all I might have offended, know that it was not my intent to imply you are pretending, it was more my intent to suggest those who do not share that belief do so in an effort to better emulate the True Roman Way.

Vale!

Appius Claudius

 

Thanks for the information and understanding. To be honest my purpose for posting in the first place was to suggest that those who felt a

On Mon, 30 Oct 2006 07:09:15 -0000, M. Lucretius Agricola wrote

> Salve!
>
> Thank you for your frankness. In case you are not aware, in the
> Religio Romana it matters not what you think or believe. It is what
> you do that is all in all. That is to say, it is orthopraxy, not
> orthodoxy. So someone such as yourself would not be asked to believe
> anything at all. You consideration would be with your own conscience,
> whether you could perform the acts.
>
> Since you are never asked to believe, it need not be role-playing. If
> you drive your car early on empty streets and come to a stop sign, you
> will stop. Not because you believe there is danger, but because that
> is the action that is prescribed for you. You may be able to think of
> other, better examples. In any event, you probably wouldn't say that
> your stop was role playing. You perform the act because the law says
> it is your duty to do so, and you are fulfilling your duty. Your
> opinion about the necessity of the stop is never asked for and matters
> not at all.
>
> Of course, if taking the role play position is helpful to you, you are
> free to take it. Nobody has a care at all about what is in your heart
> or mind. We care only that the actions (including words) be done properly.
>
> I'm not an espert on these things, so please don't hold it against
> people who know better if I have mis-spoken. All this is just to the
> best of my knowledge.
>
> Optime vale
>
> M. Lucr. Agricola
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "drumax" <drumax@...> wrote:
> >
> > My apologies, I was not aware that people still believe in these
> gods in ernest. I did not mean to belittle your religion or anyones
> religion for that matter be they christian, jew, hindu, etc....
> Cetianly that makes this issue simple for those who do indeed believe
> in these gods.
> >
> > For me it would be role-playing because indeed I, and I am sure
> other members, do NOT believe in it, nor is it what brought me here,
> nor will I ever believe in the gods of Rome. As I have said, for the
> sake of Nova Roma and historical accuracy I am willing to go through
> the motions (to a point) as that would be what is expected of me at
> this time.
> >
> > Ap. Claudius
> >
> > On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 22:44:53 -0000, M. Lucretius Agricola wrote
> > > Salve
> > >
> > > Nor am I.
> > >
> > > optime vale in pace deorum
> > >
> > > M. Lucretius Agricola
> > >
> > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Rick Sciarappa <obiwan6797@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Salve.
> > > >
> > > > Agreed. When I approach my Lararium, when
> > > > I make an offering - I am not playing a game...
> > > > I am not acting.
> > > >
> > > > Vale optime in pace Deorum
> > > >
> > > > Lucius Cassius Cornutus
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Oct 29, 2006, at 2:54 PM, David Kling (Modianus) wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Q. Caecilio Metello salutem dicit
> > > > >
> > > > > No. You are not the only one who sees something wrong with it.
> The
> > > > > Religio
> > > > > Romana is "real life." Nova Roma is "real life." We are not a
> > > > > re-enactment
> > > > > society. We are not a Roman SCA.
> > > > >
> > > > > Vale;
> > > > >
> > > > > Modianus
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/29/06, Q. Caecilius Metellus <sapientissimi@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Q. Caecilius Cn. Marino Quiritibusque sal.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > P.S. -- Am I the only one who sees something wrong in the
> title of
> > > > > this
> > > > > > thread?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salvete
I was just thinking on this and there it says
"
jus auspicium
when he takes the auguries upon calling a comitia to assemble, upon
taking office as a magistrate, at the erection of a temple,"
should I be saveing up money to get a augur to come out here to PDX to
help with the erection of the temple on the plance i am buying as i
want to use it as the temple of my offices of Sacerdos Templi Mercurius
Sacerdotus Provincia America Boreoccidentalis? and do I have to get a
officer of the state also? IE who all do I need to do a set-up for a
temple to be used for the state?
do I have have auguries taken for
#1 before buying the land in the friet place? ( as i am wanting ti use
said land for putting up a temple?
#2 or can it wait for when i want to use it for the gods and make it
the gods templium?

Salve, excellent Modianus,

I thank a lot your support, and agree with each word of you. Piscinus is a
admirably man. If I have the honor to be elected, the honor for me will be a
thousand times more if Piscinus shares the consulship as well.

Consulship is a diplomatic magistrature, we must be flexible. On tribunate,
we could be loose-tongue, it is really the duty of the tribune. That is why
the own Religio Romana protects the tribunes.

Both of us have become more mature on these years. Time indeed is the father
of truth.

Vale,
L. Arminius Faustus
FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!


2006/10/30, David Kling (Modianus) <tau.athanasios@...>:

>
> Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus S.P.D.
>
> Consul is an important Magistrate within Nova Roma. I encourage
> everyone to consider how important this office is and how important it
> is to consider who is elected. This is why I endorse the following
> citizens: L. Arminius Faustus and M. Moravius Piscinus.
>
> I worked with Faustus when he and I were tribunes back in 2003. He
> and I didn't agree on everything, and there were often heated
> discussions on the tribune list. However, I believe him to be
> unselfishly dedicated to Nova Roma and I believe he would labor for
> the best interest of Nova Roma and that he would display diplomacy and
> fairness.
>
> I have worked with M. Moravius Piscinus this year in his capacity as
> tribune, as well as in the Collegium Pontificum in his capacity as a
> Flamen. He is extremely knowledgeable on matters Roman and his
> diplomatic nature and willingness to contribute to Nova Roma will be a
> blessing.
>
> Valete:
>
> Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
> Consul
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

By queen Minerva, my personal devotion, by Ceres Almight, patroness of the
plebeians, and by the holy Vesta, lar of the State.

On glorious Brasilia, my province, on macronational life we just ended the
major elections, for president, governors, senators and overall congressman.


Listening this afternoon to the senatores discoursing about the modern
democracy and the results of the macronational elections, it was inevitable
that my mind has gone to think about the Ancient Roman System, its
differences and similarities, making a mediation of what we face here in NR.


Asking for your votes is a constant during these campaign times. I ask
again: FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL. However, it is not worthy taking time from our
personal life without a conception of for what we are here. I dont desire to
be consul if I am not able to challenge the Magistrates, Comitia and the
Senate to think about it.

For what are we here?
What is our purpose?
Are we different from our original purposes?
Had we original purposes?
Are the original purposes... worthy?
Or - at least - were they clearly stated?
Who makes the purposes?
The purposes shall be changed?
Have the purposes changed?
Where are the purposes stated?
If it is stated, we are following them?
If we followed, the result was good?
If we hadn´t followed yet, have we to create new ones?

Making the right questions are even better than having the answers. In fact,
frankly speaking, much of the questions above I don´t have a clear view.
Alas, it would be much arrogance (or even... hubrys) anyone say ´I know the
answers!´. Much more suitable to be a prophet than a politician.

As ever, I try to search on Roman History the answer. We are very far away
of the religious/cultural/technological background of the ancient romans,
however, not trying to see Roman History as the source of experience, is
spending precious time re-discovering the weel.

When the plebeians left the city, during the struggles that resulted on the
creation of the tribunate, this unique and most beloved by the gods
magistrature, much patricians really felt a relief. For them, the plebeians
weren´t the ´founders´. The city really were better without them, since they
not followed the gentilic religio of the patricians. The patricians could
care of the city with their legions of clients.

Others, however, were concerned about the manpower of the army. And - on a
very pragmatic view, had understand that all colaboration of someone else
had a political bill to be paid. Rome couldn´t anymore to use the plebeians
strenght (specially felt on the army that time) without granting them more
space on the Republic.

That is why I believe NR is changing for better, whenever its allows the
influence of new citizens flow into itself. But there is all times the
´rotten oranges´ going to the basket. Let the system learn how to ride
itself of them. All struggle allows improvements. We are seeing year to year
this happening.

Nova Roma shall not be a personal toy. Nova Roma shall not have laws carved
on stone (more suitable to Religions, not Republics). Nova Roma shall not
have ´strong man´ that hoards titles. The own legend tell us: When Romulus
was take to the sky, it was not for his glory at all, but to the city grow
without any ´tutelar´ man to patronize the citizens all times. Like the
teenager that must keep distance of the fathers to grow his own personality.
The gods were seeing far away of Romulus´ thinking. Let´s Romulus watch the
city for the Heaven, keep for the ´new´ Numa to deal himself with the
'human' mid-term affairs.

It is a paradox, but I believe we must be Revolutionary for the old roman
republican system.

One of the greatest weakness NR is suffering now is despite the politics, we
do very few to the other aspects we must deal. We are very developed on
politics, oh, we are. And the sodalitas... few remain active... Something to
think about...

***

I decided to take a different approuch on this campaign, more roman I think.
I´m not a macronational candidate on a macronational democracy with a big
term of 4-5 years to plan and make the implementation of something, that
hasn´t to care about colleagues vetoing him, and having a party to support
him on a Congress. So, I am not speaking about a discourse like "I'll do
this, I 'll do that". Experience on this Republic shows it simply not work
on most of 90% of the promises. Even the romans doubted of candidates like
that. When a consul was forced to - for example - win a war during its term
due to election promises, usually brought the disaster. The good roman
consul will act on the behalf of the Republic on all circunstances, and
implement the politics the Senate adviced or the Comitia approved.

History teaches us: The long-term planning on the Republic is a duty of the
Senate. That is why the most experience have a seat there for life. If NR
Senate is not been able to reach this long term planning, it is just shame
for us, senatores. If you honour me with your vote, as consul (and I pray my
future colleague agrees with me, otherwise it is in vain) I will rely on the
collective wiseness of the Senate for the long-term planning. Some people
thinks I am a Comitia fanatic. Yes, for the duties of the Comitia, as the
ultimate source of power, and the right of 'apelo'. But we must give the
Senate its right historical duty as well.

I still have much more to speak. Next time I come back. Much more than one
fast speech... or even a life... Ars magna vita brevis...

Valete bene in pacem deorum,
L. Arminius Faustus

FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salve,

Fast rule of thumb for citizens: Edictum is a written order of a magistrate
within its power (Potestas or Imperium). A magistrate can give oral/verbal
orders. When he writes it, it is an edictum.

Vale,
L. Arminius Faustus
FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!


2006/10/28, A. Apollonius Cordus <a_apollonius_cordus@...>:

>
>
> A. Apollonius C. Equitio sal.
>
> You asked me a couple of specific questions.
>
> > Did the priestly colleges in ancient Rome actually issue edicta or
> decreta? If so, what kind of legal standing did they have?
> <
>
> We sometimes get a little confused because we use Latin words like
> "edictum" and "decretum" exclusively as technical terms with technical
> meanings, whereas for ancient Romans (and modern Latin-speakers) these were
> (and are) just words. An edictum is, yes, a certain type of document issued
> in a certain way and having a certain legal effect, but it is also simply
> anything which a person "speaks forth" ("ex" - outwards or away - and "dico"
> - I say something). A decretum is an official statement made by a public
> official or body which may have certain legal effects, but it is also simply
> anything which a person decides, concludes, believes, or announces (from
> "decerno" - I settle, decide, announce, &c.).
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salve,

David Kling (Modianus) wrote:

>Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Flavio Vedio Germanico salutem dicit
>
>"Although I must confess to a certain puzzlement. I ran for Consul at your
>urging. You told me you would support my candidacy."
>
>Incorrect. You expressed your desire to run for Consul to me, and I told
>you that it would be difficult. I also told you that my full support goes
>to Piscinus.
>
>

You, sir, are a liar, pure and simple. You explicitly asked me to run
for Consul, and I expressed my own concerns at the time, months before I
called you and informed you of my decision to accept your advice and
run. I know what goes into the job and how much of a time-commitment it is.

>"Could it be that you are finding out that just because a man is an
>Accesnsus, that is not the same as
>saying he is your slave, sworn to uphold your every ill-conceived
>initiative?"
>
>I expect no one working for me to act as a slave. But I do expect them to
>offer feedback and be of assistance. You have tried to use me to further
>your own ends. When we talked it was typically in support of your plans,
>and your efforts to make a "come back." It was not to discuss the Religio
>Reform or other items. It was to discuss you and your plans.
>
>

This is just so far removed from reality as to cause me to wonder just
what color the sky is in your world. I'm not the one who wanted a
"comeback." You came to me and wanted to lever me back into the
Collegium Augurum to counter your deadlock with Cincinnatus. Then you
approached me and said you wanted me to run for Consul with Piscinus.
First you toss me to the wolves regarding the Augurship, and then you do
it again in regards to the Consulship. You're the one who's been doing
the "using," Consul.

>"Face it. You are pissed off that I didn't vote for your "Religio Reform" in
>the Senate. It's okay to admit it. You're human. Not a very good one, but
>you're human."
>
>You voted against something without offering me a single piece of input. As
>an accensus you have an obligation to advise me, and you failed to do that.
>You did not offer any input on the Religio Reform. If your job was to
>advise me, and you didn't then you didn't do you job. If you cannot be an
>accensus, how can you be consul?
>
>

If you cannot be trusted to give complete information, how is any
Accensus expected to perform his or her job adequately? You claimed that
the measure had the support of the Collegium Pontificum. You omitted the
fact that you railroaded the vote through the CP, with only three people
actually knowing there _was_ a vote, and proceeded to try to do so in
the Senate. You've been completely disingenuous throughout the entire
matter, and I am pleased that the power grab you attempted has been
thwarted.

The organs of the Religio must not be put under the control of those who
are not themselves practitioners, and certainly without their own
consent. Your own personal frustrations with the Collegium Pontificum
are not sufficient to override that basic fact.

>"I have a record of achievement. The Foundation of the Republic in my first
>Consulship. The initiation of a firm financial foundation for the Republic
>in my second Consulship. And, if I am given the chance, the establishment of
>local groups to plant our roots firmly into the Earth, that our organization
>never perishes, and, indeed, prospers more than any of us can possibly
>imagine."
>
>A record of achievement? You left Nova Roma twice. You (although you claim
>it was your wife) took the main e-mail list with you.
>

There are slander laws here in Nova Roma. I have always thought they
were a terrible idea. But I confess to a certain temptation to employ
them in this case.

That is another lie and you know it. I was not the list owner. I had
nothing to do with her decision, and as a matter of fact disagreed with
it at the time. What you (yet again) conveniently forget is that I am
the one who brought the list back.

>Is it possible that
>you want to be consul for a third time to redeem your past failures?
>

I don't consider the foundation of the Republic a failure. I don't
consider the establishment of a financial foundation for the Republic a
failure.

I want to be Consul for a third time to move Nova Roma forward. To take
it to the next level. You've not done it, and neither have your
predecessors over the last four years. You lack drive. Vision.
Imagination. And that is precisely what Nova Roma needs at its helm.

My Consulships were marked by progress. Your Consulship is marked by the
maintenance of the status quo. THAT is failure.

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus
Pater Patriae
Consular

http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Flavius_Vedius_Germanicus_(Election_MMDCCLIX)

Salve,

Uhh... beautiful pronomen...

Vale,
L. Arminius Faustus

FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!


2006/10/30, Fausta Martiana Gangalia Minervalis <Minervalis@...>:

>
> Salvete,
>
> I looked up my information in the Album Civium, and saw that I need to
> make
> a correction to my "personal website". Unfortunately, I couldn't find a
> way
> to do it. Does anyone know how to edit the information on the Album Civium
> page? Will I have to create an account with Wikipedia?
>
> Thanks in advance for any advice. :-)
>
> Valete,
>
> F. Martiana
>
> --
> Fausta Martiana Gangalia Minervalis
>
> "Leve fit, quod bene fertur, onus."
> (The burden which is borne well becomes light) - Ovid
>
> My Yahoo page
> http://360.yahoo.com/minervalis_barnowl
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Mon, 30 Oct 2006, flavius leviticus wrote:

> Salve,Publius Livius Triarius,Call me stupid .Or maybe I am reading you
> wrong.Either way I feel a little more elaboration of your premise is
> due.If you are calling me insincere in my profession of faith in the
> Religeo Romana as being akin to a sci fi fan,than you are laboring under
> a false premise.As far as time and money as you say is concerned many of
> us can spend it elsewhere.If you do not respect my faith as anything but
> sincere then you in my opinion are nothing more than a religeous
> bigot.Which is about as equal to a racial one in my book.If my
> preception is incorrect I will also gladly apologize to you in public.I
> hope that will be the case in this situation.Vale,Appius Galerius
> Aurelianus.

I believe you are reading me wrongly. I meant to convey that if we are
devoting time, money and energy to Nova Roma it is meaningless to question
whether we are "sincere"; the devotion is proof of sincerity.

Perhaps some of us might be a little bent out of shape at your suggestion
that "being akin to a sci fi fan" is something undesirable.
But...um...what is the Latin for "Chacun a son gout"? "De gustibus"
something, I recall.

-- Publius Livius Triarius

Salve A. Apollonius Cordus

Thank you amice for you kind words and support. I promise not to let you or Nova Roma down.
As I said earlier I also support the election of L. Arminius and look forward to working with
him for the betterment of the Republic.

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
Candidate for Consul

A. Apollonius omnibus sal.

....."It's pretty easy for me to decide who to vote for to be consul. It's easy because I always try, wherever possible, to vote for the candidates who are best qualified according to the ancient cursus honorum. That means that when I'm looking for a consul, I choose people who have been praetor. There are two of those here: Ti. Galerius and L. Arminius. The decision is made all the easier by the fact that, apart from being properly qualified, they are both excellent fellows and excellent magistrates; and I'm proud to say that they're also friends of mine. :) They would make a complementary pair, too. Ti. Galerius is eminently practical, and has put forward a very impressive set of concrete proposals which he would like to carry forward in office. He has not just voiced vague hopes and dreams but shown a clear intention to execute specific policies in specific ways. L. Arminius, meanwhile, is one of our most Roman Romans, and would bring stability and Romanitas to the republic simply by standing at the tiller and steering a steady course.'.....








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

F. Galerius Aurelianus S.P.D.

I believe that the Censores currently have all the powers they need
concerning the Nota. I do not believe that we need to invest them with any further
powers and I stand against the current proposal to invest the Censores with
additional power to prevent someone from standing to office. Any further
powers or interpretation/definition of the lex regarding the nota will just mean
more legal folderol.

Valete.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

QSP,

I would normally agree with you on the food and drink as a big draw but just
remember to cut the amount of garlic in your moretum as the heads were
smaller in those days. I forgot about that and actually had citizens running away
from the event due to the moretum. However, we were virtually insect free
that day.

FGA


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Actually, brother, we are a Roman SCA in terms of politics and guilds and
houses and tribes. The only differences between the SCA and Nova Roma are:

1. we are a much smaller organization;
2. we were founded for the reconstruction & revitalization of the Religio
Romana;
3. we are culturally & historically specific (753 BCE-395 CE);
4. it is very difficult to persuade our leadership to get off the internet &
into the real world;
5. the magistrates take themselves entirely too seriously (oops, sorry.
That is very much like the SCA royalty, nobility, and the peerage--just scratch
number 5).

Remembering that hilaritas (good times) is a public virtue,

F. Galerius Aurelianus


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> A. Tullia Scholastica C. Fabio Buteoni Modiano consuli quiritibus S.P.D.
>
>
>
> Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus S.P.D.
>
> Scholastica, a candidate for Praetor, has been active in Nova Roma
> behind the scenes as a rogatrix, scribe, accensus, interpreter, and
> within two sodalitates. Her involvement and activity is a testament
> to her dedication. Many magistrates are indebted to her for her
> skills in Latin translation. Nova Roma has a hidden treasure in
> Scholastica and it is about time that she be honored for the dedicated
> and able person she is.
>
>
> ATS: Thank you very much for your support. It is a great honor to have a
> consul support another candidate.
>
> Another candidate for Praetor that I support is T. Iulius Sabinus. I
> have watched his administration of the Ludi in his role as Curule
> Aedile and his dedication is impressive. I believe a team of
> Scholastica & Sabinus would be a good team.
>
> ATS: Let me add that T. Iulius Sabinus has worked very, very hard as
> aedilis curulis, something I know firsthand from being in his cohors. He is
> not one to cut and run when the going gets rough, or one to lose his temper.
> He has done a wonderful job almost singlehandedly, and I trust that the
> citizenry enjoyed all of the ludi he superintended.
>
> Both of these candidates have my support.
>
> ATS: Thank you again for your kind words, and for your support.
>
> Valete:
>
> Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
> Consul
>

Vale, et valete,

A. Tullia Scholastica



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus F. Galerio Aureliano salutem dicit

And we do not take on personas like the SCA does. Nor do we pretend to be
living in ancient Rome, at least I don't. A modern 21st century community
based on Romanitas.

Vale:

Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus

On 10/30/06, PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@... <PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@... > wrote:
>
> Actually, brother, we are a Roman SCA in terms of politics and guilds
> and
> houses and tribes. The only differences between the SCA and Nova Roma are:
>
> 1. we are a much smaller organization;
> 2. we were founded for the reconstruction & revitalization of the Religio
> Romana;
> 3. we are culturally & historically specific (753 BCE-395 CE);
> 4. it is very difficult to persuade our leadership to get off the internet
> &
> into the real world;
> 5. the magistrates take themselves entirely too seriously (oops, sorry.
> That is very much like the SCA royalty, nobility, and the peerage--just
> scratch
> number 5).
>
> Remembering that hilaritas (good times) is a public virtue,
>
> F. Galerius Aurelianus
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Strange as it may seem (and I am hoping that it is not just the Nyquil
talking), I find myself in total agreement with this post concerning M. Moravius
Piscinus Horatianus. I find him to be willing to swallow his pride over some
past actions and embrace participation in Nova Roma again.
I agree that our organization is lucky to have him at the present time.

F. Galerius Aurelianus


Pompeia Quiritibus Novae Romae Sal.

I have read a couple of disappointing posts here today. I know it is
election time and the rhetoric gets more heated than normal. Inspite
of this, I think some remarks were below the belt. The content of
these exchanges implies that Marcus Moravius Piscinus Horatianus
Tribunis Plebis et Flamen is some sort of cybergremlin who
forms 'rival' groups against NR.

For the benefit of those who may not know this individual, this is
totally misleading and unfair to a man who has devoted so much time
and study to the advancement of Roman culture and religion. He is
also one of very few devotees to the Cultus Deorum who can say that he
was raised in a religion very similar to this one while he was growing
up.

I suggest, if you are curious, you do a google search and just type in
Piscinus. And you will see essays, translations, explaining and
crossreferencing a plethora of subjects related to the Religio and
Roman Culture. I think you might be pleasantly surprised at what is
out there, and you will get a better perspective on how hard this
individual has worked, and how generous he has been with his research,
with any individual or Roman community who has asked for it.

Nova Roma is fortunate to have Piscinus. We are especially fortunate
that he has offered to stand for Consul next year.

Getting back to those pesky 'rival' groups. They are not rival groups
really, just other places to go. Not everyone who leaves NR abandons
the religio or their appetite for the ancient histories, food,
military stuff, etc. I would suggest that perhaps...just *maybe*....
the other groups in question were ultimately formed by NR herself.

Valete



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Cato A. Cordo Equitio Marino quiritibusque SPD

Salvete omnes.

First, I thank censor Marinus and Apollonius Cordus for the nice
things they said about me - I know that I can be exceedingly
difficult, and it is good to know that two of the men for whom I have
great respect can see past the pain-in-the-butt exterior to what is an
overwhelming desire to be of use to the Republic. To my fellow
citizens I say that every ounce of my fervor will be directed towards
the continuing growth of the Republic whether I am elected praetor or
not.

Of course, I'd rather it be the former than the latter :-)

Valete bene,

Cato

F. Galerius Aurelianus S.P.D.

Regardless of the reason for the founding of Nova Roma, we should recognize
that there are many different reasons for being attached to the organization.
If someone is willing to give in to the outward forms of respect and
worship of the Immortal Gods, then they are following the NR Constitution. We know
that historical Romans like Cicero did not believe in the Roman Gods either.
My personal views of Dii Consentes and Dii Immortales may be different from
those of Metellus Pontifex but we both work for the good of the Sacra et
Religio.

Appius Claudius Drusus is welcome to hold to whatever personal spiritual
beliefs he wishes as long as he does so privately and doesn't put any other
person's down.

We also have to recognize a certain suspension of disbelief for our
organization to function within Nova Roma. The Constitution and all the other
aspects of our organization place us in a sub-culture of the greater 21st-century
world.

Valete.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Chill out, Appius Claudius Drusus. You are just as welcome in Nova Roma as
any other citizen. We all have to embrace the Nova as well as the Roma in
our organization. Some want to bring our political and religious practices
more in line with that of the late Republic. Others look to a more moderate
approach to our organization's model republic. Personally, I embrace you as a
fellow citizen here in the house not built with hands that is the Internet. I
look forward to working with you after the election to help design a good
flyer for Nova Roma and my province. I want you to come down to
Austrorientalis, park your carcass on a couch, and sip wine while we make fun of each other
and the administration.

Valete.

F. Galerius Aurelianus


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salvete

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "A. Apollonius Cordus"
<a_apollonius_cordus@...> wrote:
<snipped>

> And here is an interesting example of a serious religious crisis

being handled without the formal involvement of any priestly collegia
at all:

>
> Livy 39.13-19.
>
>

This incident is about a foreign cultus, and the Senate regulation of
the Bacchae in 186 BCE. It really doesn't apply to the religio
Romana, and doesn't seem to have fallen under the jurisdiction of any
of the Collegia. Perhaps it is not the best example to use on the
questions considered. I agree with what Cordus has been saying on
responsa from the different collegia. A better example to illustrate
what he has been saying is perhaps Livy 31.10.7-9. There a consul
vowed gifts and games to Jupiter. But in order to become a public
vow it more or less had to be accepted first by the Senate, and this
was delayed when the pontifex maximus Licinius said that a vow could
not be made with an indefinite amount stated. Licinius posed that a
specific amount had to be stated since it would have to be set aside
and not used for any other purpose, such as financing the war. That
interpretation was based on tradition that once something was
designated for sacrifice it could not be used for any other purpose.
But the consul then appealled the pontifex maximus' pronouncement to
the full Collegium Pontificum, which determined that his vow was not
only possible but even more correct. So here we have a pontifex
invoking what he saw to be traditional religious customs, but a
responsum over rulled him by making an official determination on
religious custom, not state law really, and the process for making
that determination was a request for a responsum.

Another example to look at in Livy is perhaps 34.44.1-3 where PM
Licinius announced to the Senate and to the Collegium that the ver
sacrum performed the year prior had been flawed and must be performed
again. Implied was an appeal by Licinius to the Collegium, and that
it then issued a responsum on which the Senate acted, because Livy
mentioned how the offerings for the rite had to be defined, and the
whole of the rites, which were performed by private citizens under a
senatorial consultus, would be under the direction of the pontifices,
i.e. a colegial responsum.

You might look at Livy 23.31.15 as well. There an omen was seen, and
the augures came to declare that it signified a defect in a consular
election. Everyone had heard and seen the thunderclap so that there
was no doubt of there having been an omen. A question was then sent
to the augures to offer an interpretation on what it could mean.
They responded in a responsum. But it was the Senate that then made
a decision on what defect had occurred in the election, and what was
to be done about it.

And then another passage in Livy to which I referred earlier is 7.1.1
where aediles were commissioned to see that none but Roman Gods
should be worshipped (presumably within the pomerium) and only in the
ancestral way. These aediles could not have been Aediles Curules
because the incident occurs some 60 years prior to such magistrates.
It might refer to the Aediles Plebes, but in 427 BCE they would have
still been only officers of the Aventine Temple of Ceres, Liber, and
Libera, so plebeian officials but not exactly recognized as state
officials then. Or it could have been aediles in a broader sense of
temple officials throughout Rome. But who commissioned them, who
made it a law in our legal understanding, was probably the Senate.
The Collegium Pontificum is not mentioned or implied.

There is a similar story where it was the Senate calling upon the
Praetor instead to enforce law against what the Senate deemed
inappropriate sacrifices, and that Senate determination may have come
after a pontifical responsum. But nothing in Livy shows that
pontifical or augural responsa were binding as law on any magistrate.

In Valerius Maximus there are more examples to cite. The pontifices
and augures could offer their opinions on what was traditional
customs of the religio Romana. But enforcement of "religious law"
was generally made by magistrates, specifically the praetores, and at
the advice of the Senate rather than that of the Collegia.

The only case where we see pontifices "enforcing" religious law, is
where PM Licinius publicly executed a pontifex minor for violating a
vestal virgin. But there the relationship of the pontifex maximus
over the vestales, and over a pontifex minor who served the Collegium
Pontificum, was much different from other examples that can be found.

Valete optime
M Moravius Piscinus

Cn. Iulius Caesar omnibus sal

Two men are running for Praetor who I strongly urge you to support.

Gaius Equitius Cato:

Cato is without doubt possessed of an excellent mind, a sharp and
highly developed wit and an undeniable loyalty to our res publica.
Cato is man who won't surrender a principle for personal gain or
advantage and he can't be intimidated.

This man has all the natural qualities of a Praetor and I should know
as I have served as his Quaestor this year. His abilities and
potential are a fraction of that displayed so far in this forum, and
that display has been impressive enough as it is.

Titus Iulius Sabinus:

Sabinus is another man who will make an excellent Praetor. He stands
for justice and common sense, rare enough commodities on their own.
They are combined in this man. He has passion, yet controlled and
focused. He knows how to motivate people. He will not flinch from
difficult decisions.

I have worked with Sabinus on a number of ventures and he too shares
with Cato a love of this res publica. He is determined and will stick
a job out to the end.

To echo Cordus' sentiments if these two men are not elected as
Praetors there is something drastically wrong with this place. They
will make an excellent team and their personalities are distinct but
a very good match.

Not true, oh very not true. The Roman form of augury is ascribed to Attus
Navius during the Royal Period. He practiced augury before being named as the
first Augur by Tarquinus Priscus Rex. Any person can take the auspices
privately and if a magistrate establishes a templum according to the usual rites,
it is valid as an auguralum. I have done so.

F. Galerius Aurelianus


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Pompeia Minucia Strabo Consul Quiritibus Novae Romae S.P.D.

I offer my opinions on the candidates whom I feel would best serve the
republic in the year 2760 AVC.

CENSOR

G. Fabius Buteo Modianus

As Junior Consul I've naturally spent alot of time via email and phone
with Modianus Consul throughout the year. We consider ourselves
separate consulships, but we've worked quite harmoniously. I am sure
there are those who once thought this was not imaginable much less
doable at one point, but when two people care about one common goal,
which is NR, it is amazingly easy to get along and not sweat small
stuff. I find him to be dedicated and he takes his responsibilities
toward the Republic and the Cultus Deorum very seriously. He has
gained much insight and experience during his consulship, and I have
no doubt he will be a good censor for Nova Roma and what's more, a
good colleague to the current censor.

CONSULS

I will cast stones at the cista for Marcus Moravius Piscinus
Horatianus and Lucius Arminius Faustus.

Piscinus offers much administrative experience, knowledge of Roman
law, and his religious resource and dedication are tough to find
*anywhere* much less NR. He has served well as Tribune, as I expected
he would. He looks at issues from all sides before making a final
decision, and that is to be commended. And you will receive a
decision..one that is well contemplated. I have no doubt he will make
an excellent Consul.

I am especially impressed with the frankness of Faustus, who promises
a year's worth of hard work...not a set of plans which can be
accomplished only within 4 or 5 years. He alluded to a Consulship
being a small part of a large mosaic, and this is so. A year's work
for a year's term. A reasonable promise. Faustus is dedicated to a
realistic restoration of the ancient ways and is dedicated to Minerva,
Ceres, Vesta. He is a compassionate individual who listens to the
concerns of people and will administer the law with the needs of the
citizens in mind, as well as a positive direction for the republic.
He has past magisterial experience also and he would be an asset to
Piscinus.

I have known Piscinus since 2000, and I have known Faustus since 2002.

PRAETORES

A. Tullia Scholastic is an excellent choice.

I read one argument that she hasn't been a Quaestor yet. This is
ancient law and not NR law. I hear though, from the other side of the
same mouth, a loud voice of support for some serving consecutive
magistracies.... but this is not ancient law either, quite contrary to
it, but it's NR law. Hmmm.

We don't have enough people in NR to yield so strictly to the ancient
mos maiorum in every respect, and so our laws state that one must
serve six months in the ordinarii (generally defined as elected
positions) or six months in the governorship to be considered for
Praetor, Consul or Censor. This providing they don't resign in that year.

Tullia has not violated this law or we wouldn't have honoured her
candidacy as Consuls.

She has served as elected Rogator this year (assistant to the
Censores) which is far busier, with respect, than a Quaestorhip,
unless one is a Consular or Aedilician Quaestor. Lots of Quaestors
don't get the opportunity to do much of anything, so this position,
although honouring of the ancient mos maiorum, is not much of a
prerequisite to the Praetorship in Nova Roma, as far as relevant
experience is concerned.

Flavia (as she is often called) gained much of her relevant experience
when serving as a scriba for the webmaster in 2004-2005, assisting in
the rearranging of the Tabularium laws...reading them, correcting them
and giving them proper Latin titles. She has on occasion, written me
to remind me of this law and that in anticipation of some event, ie
election, whatever...and she knows these laws, believe me...because I
know them also pretty much [ I have to :>)], and so I'm able to
determine her handle on this. She has also served as Praetoral Scriba
this year, assisting with list moderation. Her other past and present
activities in NR include her instruction of Latin through Acadmia
Thules and membership in Sodalitas Latinitas. She serves as official
Latin translator for Nova Roma. She is active and has served in
officerships in Sodalitas Musarum. What I like most about her is her
consistent willingness to render greetings to new citizens, and her
willingness and skill to give accurate explanations regarding laws,
procedures, who to ask what, and where to go, whatever, to those who
ask. She is librarian, welcome wagon, walking codex, Latinist and I
have no doubt that she will serve the republic *very* well in the
capacity of Praetor.

***********

Titus Iulius Sabinus is a zealous citizen whom I've had the great
pleasure of knowing for nearly two years. He has been a fantastic
Curule Aedile, attentive to both his duties of hosting Ludi, and in
the custodianship of the Magna Mater project. His enthusiasm naturally
motivates his cohortes to become active and involved. He worked with
his predecessor Lucius Iulius Sulla Curule Aedile in the Magna Mater
effort, where I first met him.

Sabine has served well as my Consular Accensus, and he, too, has
demonstrated a good knowledge of the law in his discussions with me on
this situation and that within NR. He is good to remind me well in
advance..."Have you noticed that this has to be attended to, Po?" And
he will have the link to the laws ready for me to inspect....just so
helpful and knowledgeable on the laws and procedures. He has also
served as Scribe to the Praetores this year. He serves as Governor of
Dacia. He is virtuous and will deliver justice, and he would work
well with his Praetoral partner and the rest of the magistrature of NR.

Valete

I look forward to that. I have to admit that parking my carcass on a couch and sipping wine is one of my favorite pass times and preferred methods of keeping the memory of Rome alive and well if not a bit blurry.

On Mon, 30 Oct 2006 21:57:49 EST, PADRUIGTHEUNCLE wrote
 I want you to come down to

> Austrorientalis, park your carcass on a couch, and sip wine while we make fun of each other
> and the administration.
>
> Valete.
>
> F. Galerius Aurelianus
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salve Faustus,

It's also a great cognomen. :-)

Faustus for Consul!

Vale,
F.Martiana

On 10/30/06, Lucius Arminius Faustus <lafaustus@...> wrote:
>
> Salve,
>
> Uhh... beautiful pronomen...
>
> Vale,
> L. Arminius Faustus
>
> FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
>
> 2006/10/30, Fausta Martiana Gangalia Minervalis <Minervalis@...<Minervalis%40gmail.com>
> >:
> >
> > Salvete,
> >
> > I looked up my information in the Album Civium, and saw that I need to
> > make
> > a correction to my "personal website". Unfortunately, I couldn't find a
> > way
> > to do it. Does anyone know how to edit the information on the Album
> Civium
> > page? Will I have to create an account with Wikipedia?
> >
> > Thanks in advance for any advice. :-)
> >
> > Valete,
> >
> > F. Martiana
> >
> > --
> > Fausta Martiana Gangalia Minervalis
> >
> > "Leve fit, quod bene fertur, onus."
> > (The burden which is borne well becomes light) - Ovid
> >
> > My Yahoo page
> > http://360.yahoo.com/minervalis_barnowl
> >
> >
>
>
>
>



--
Fausta Martiana Gangalia Minervalis

"Leve fit, quod bene fertur, onus."
(The burden which is borne well becomes light) - Ovid

My Yahoo page
http://360.yahoo.com/minervalis_barnowl


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

salve
I was given a voter code for the last election. Do I use this again or
apply for a new one.
Vale
Marca Sempronia Iustina

M. Hortensia F. Martianae Fausto spd;
*sob* Fausta was my excellent cognomen too, but it's a
tangled tale of bad nomenclature;- New cives will not have to suffer
as I did. But fortunately we can all vote for Faustus!:)
Fauste Roma fortuna est!

(god I hope my latin is correct)
bene valete amici
Marca Hortensia Maior

> Salve Faustus,
>
> It's also a great cognomen. :-)
>
> Faustus for Consul!
>
> Vale,
> F.Martiana
>
>
> On 10/30/06, Lucius Arminius Faustus <lafaustus@...> wrote:
> >
> > Salve,
> >
> > Uhh... beautiful pronomen...
> >
> > Vale,
> > L. Arminius Faustus
> >
> > FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
> >
> > 2006/10/30, Fausta Martiana Gangalia Minervalis

<Minervalis@...<Minervalis%40gmail.com>

> > >:
> > >
> > > Salvete,
> > >
> > > I looked up my information in the Album Civium, and saw that I

need to

> > > make
> > > a correction to my "personal website". Unfortunately, I

couldn't find a

> > > way
> > > to do it. Does anyone know how to edit the information on the

Album

> > Civium
> > > page? Will I have to create an account with Wikipedia?
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance for any advice. :-)
> > >
> > > Valete,
> > >
> > > F. Martiana
> > >
> > > --
> > > Fausta Martiana Gangalia Minervalis
> > >
> > > "Leve fit, quod bene fertur, onus."
> > > (The burden which is borne well becomes light) - Ovid
> > >
> > > My Yahoo page
> > > http://360.yahoo.com/minervalis_barnowl
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Fausta Martiana Gangalia Minervalis
>
> "Leve fit, quod bene fertur, onus."
> (The burden which is borne well becomes light) - Ovid
>
> My Yahoo page
> http://360.yahoo.com/minervalis_barnowl
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Q. Caecilius Metellus Fetialis Fl. Germanico C. Buteoni Praetoribus
Quiritibus salutem plurimam dicit.

While I recognise the Roman tradition of heated argument in the Forum,
let us not forget the equally Roman values of Peace, Concord, Clemency,
Patience, and above all, Nobility.

There is nothing wrong about having feelings toward someone, and there
is equally nothing wrong in expressing the fact that one has such
feelings toward another person. But rather than bring it into the
public sphere, and fill the inboxes of countless subscribers with
nothing more than the exchanges between two people about their
differences of opinion, would it not be better, and more productive, to
take things into the private sphere, and deal with them calmly,
rationally, and, most importantly, as Romans?

As a Fetial it is my duty to work to maintain the peace and just
dealings between ourselves and other nations. I see it also as my duty
to work to maintain the same amongst ourselves, because, in my
professional opinion, one can *not* even begin to hope to maintain peace
and justice between nations if one's own nation can not maintain peace
among itself.

With that said, both as a Fetial and as a Pontifex of _this_ nation, I
request that we observe a day of thanksgiving on the Nones of this
coming month, to thank all the Gods (whomever you so worship), privately
and publicly, for those things which have so benevolently been given us.
And at the same time, I ask that, so far as this forum goes, we
observe a day of silence, in recognition of our ancestors and the great
losses they suffered in the last years of the Republic.

We have only just embarked on what I believe, and what I feel we all
believe, can and will be a great thing: not simply the reinstitution of
the Roman state, but also the virtues which made it great, and made the
people which comprised it great as well. It does nothing but harm to us
to argue at such lengths over things so personally as we do now. It is
good to debate things, and to consider them deeply, but the absolute
worst thing we can do right now is to launch personal attacks against
each other. Now is the time for working together to bring the dream of
Rome into a reality, not simply in these light-boxes which sit on our
desks, but in our homes, in our families, in our communities, and, best
and most of all, in a fully landed autonomous state. This latter thing
will not ever be achieved if we continue on this path. It must stop now!

Citizens, I do not have the authority, nor would I even want the
authority, to enforce what I have requested with law. So I leave it to
all of you who choose to do so to join with me in this thanksgiving.
Let us all remember the things we have, the things that have been lost
over the years, and the things we can make happen over the coming years.
Let us work together to make those things happen. Let us take a step
back from things and shed new light on them, that perhaps we can see
what wasn't there before. One can never see the beauty of the forest if
we concentrate on the worst parts of any given tree.

Q. Caecilius Quiritibus sal.

I only have one slight addition to what Senator Piscinus has written.
In his last message:

> In Valerius Maximus there are more examples to cite. The pontifices
> and augures could offer their opinions on what was traditional
> customs of the religio Romana. But enforcement of "religious law"
> was generally made by magistrates, specifically the praetores, and at
> the advice of the Senate rather than that of the Collegia.

So far as I have read (and I'll have to check my sources on this), the
magistrates were certainly able to enforce "religious law" solely on the
advise of a given Collegium, where it was within their sphere of
influence. To use something of our past and applying it to Antiquity as
an example, a Praetor could have enforced that it was nefas to hold
court on a dies fastus* without it having ever passed through the
Senate. It may have been customary to bring things through the Senate
first, but not necessary.


Valete Optime,

Q. Caecilius Metellus

*I have made this intentionally absurd strictly for the sake of
presenting an example. It was entirely fas to hold court on a dies fastus.

A. Tullia Scholastica A. Apollonio Cordo quiritibus S.P.D.

> A. Apollonius omnibus sal.
>
> I'm going to write one more message today, then I'm going to do my best to say
> very little for the next week or so. That should come as some relief. :)
>
> The vote for censor is uncontested, so I'll not say much about it. I think C.
> Buteo is a good man and will do his best to be a good censor. I have to
> confess that I've been a little disappointed with some of the things he's done
> as consul, but I think he's seen that some of them didn't work out very well,
> and I hope that as censor he will take a moment before making big decisions to
> find out about the Roman way to do whatever he's thinking of doing.
>
> It's pretty easy for me to decide who to vote for to be consul. It's easy
> because I always try, wherever possible, to vote for the candidates who are
> best qualified according to the ancient cursus honorum. That means that when
> I'm looking for a consul, I choose people who have been praetor. There are
> two of those here: Ti. Galerius and L. Arminius. The decision is made all the
> easier by the fact that, apart from being properly qualified, they are both
> excellent fellows and excellent magistrates; and I'm proud to say that they're
> also friends of mine. :) They would make a complementary pair, too. Ti.
> Galerius is eminently practical, and has put forward a very impressive set of
> concrete proposals which he would like to carry forward in office. He has not
> just voiced vague hopes and dreams but shown a clear intention to execute
> specific policies in specific ways. L. Arminius, meanwhile, is one of our
> most Roman Romans, and would bring stability and Romanitas to the republic
> simply by standing at the tiller and steering a steady course.
>
> The other two consular candidates have their merits: M. Moravius will be a
> very good consul one day, but I do think he should be praetor first, like any
> good Roman. I was not inclined to think very much of Fl. Vedius before the
> contest started, but his early campaign-speeches impressed me with their
> pragmatism; however, his more recent messages have not shown him in a very
> pleasant light, and he has in any case been consul twice already: it's time
> for him to step aside from elected office, at least for a good many years, and
> exert his influence in the senate.
>
> What I said above about being properly qualified is especially relevant in the
> contest for the praetura. Nova Roma has witnessed some startling acts of
> defiance of the ancient cursus before, but never one so startling or so
> objectionable as A. Tullia's decision to run for praetrix - the second most
> powerful office of state - without having held any junior magistracy at all.
> The vigintisexviri, let us be clear, were not regarded as true magistrates in
> the ancient republic, and certainly did not qualify automatically for higher
> office. Nobody held any higher magistracies without being praetor. It's true
> that some people have in recent years become praetor without being quaestor,
> but they at least have been able to show past terms as aedilis or tribunus, or
> even both. For someone to run for praetor without having held any office
> apart from vigintisexvir is simply abominable.

Corde, amice, unfortunately the Fates intervened and made it impossible
for me to reply to your most recent private communication on this matter,
or, indeed, to do much else. Tens of thousands of people here are still
without telephone service, and/or cable service, almost three weeks after
being blasted into federal disaster status, and thus unable to communicate
via the net. Most of us lost power for at least a week, and some for
considerably longer, so I trust you will forgive me for being unable to
respond to your missive.

It is quite true that in antiquity, the cursus honorum was rather fixed,
and that, as in Nova Roma, there were minimum ages for these offices. In
antiquity, the minimum age for the quaestura was 31, for the praetura, 40,
and for the consulatus, 43, as I'm sure you at least are well aware. In
antiquity, one had to wait two years in between magistracies, and ten years
before holding the same office.

It is an open question as to which present and past magistrates of Nova
Roma fulfill these qualifications, or those of the strict cursus honorum,
but you may rest assured that many do not. If we had followed those rules,
we might not have found anyone to qualify for the magistracies at all. We
do not have so many people here with the time and talent for our
magistracies that ancient Rome did, to say nothing of our dearth of those
willing to serve in any of these capacities. You and I both know that it is
difficult enough to get anyone to serve in sodality offices, whose demands
are far less than those on any scriba in Nova Roma--and that in Musarum, our
scriba of two years ago disappeared, the one for last year did nada, and
neither did the curator sermonis; moreover, two years ago our coryphaeus,
Paulinus, resigned, leaving the sodalitas without a leader, a second in
command, or a webmaster, for ours also resigned and left the sodalitas.
Unfortunately, if it is difficult getting people to run for offices, it is
more so to get them to carry out the duties thereof, and that bodes ill for
our Res Publica.

There's another little something involved here, one which may be a bit
prickly, but which needs to be said. In antiquity, the only offices that I
or any other woman, however educated, might hold were those bearing serious
restrictions. A woman could be a Vestal Virgin, or she could be the Regina
Sacrorum. Not much choice there, now is there? You and I both know that
there is a political faction here which apparently thinks that tossing these
bones to the women is quite enough, that women are unfit to serve as
magistrates or to occupy the sacerdotal offices other than the two mentioned
above. Priscus would love this viewpoint, and so would his buddies. Maybe
he found the Boni while he was here; he certainly found some sympathizers.

We are in New Rome, and we are few, a happy few for the most part to be
sure, but few. Women here are fewer still if our applications for
citizenship are any guide; they seem to run ten or twenty to one in favor of
men. As a hetero woman with a fine appreciation of men, I have nothing
against men, but perhaps having a female magistrate, particularly a higher
magistrate, might deter the likes of Priscus from thinking that he or they
had found a happy hunting ground. As is, we few women are underrepresented
in the magistracies, or even among the active citizens; it might be nice to
get a different viewpoint now and again.

In addition, there is a matter of credibility. Sadly, many who should
sympathize with us laugh at us instead, deeming us dilettanti or whatever;
far too many think that we are an SCA-like reenactment group. We aren't.
Our beginnings were certainly well-intentioned, but I doubt that there was a
single academic among the early citizens. We now have several: the
world-class Latinist A. Gratius Avitus, Sextus Pontius Pilatus Barbatus,
classics students Lentulus and Metellus, and several fine Latinists among
the members of the sodalitas Latina, as Avitus prefers to call it. We also
have ancient historians and legal experts such as yourself, as well as
others who bring credit to Nova Roma. What has not happened here is that no
classicist has been elected to a higher magistracy. Do you think that our
credibility would suffer in academia or elsewhere if a classicist were a
magistrate here? The new Album Civium apparently conceals some of the names
that any Latinist would find as fodder for an attack of ROFL; let us move
forward and see if a classicist can bring at least a bit more of credibility
to us. Let us say that here we have a good many classicists, and not all of
them are in hiding; here is one who is a magistrate.

>
> This may seem to some of you an excessively stern reaction. After all, to
> someone who's not familiar with Roman constitutional rules it's not at all
> obvious that running for praetor without holding any lower magistracy is a big
> deal. Fair enough. It's not something you'd expect everyone to know. So I
> wrote to A. Tullia to explain that it was a big deal and that if she valued
> the mos majorum she should withdraw and run for some lower office. And here's
> the problem: she didn't care.

Corde, amice, you are misunderstanding me, as some have done so in the
past, and some may well continue to do so. The difference is that you and I
were communicating in Latin, whereas it is not unknown for one to be
misunderstood while speaking or writing one's native tongue.

I do care. I also care for our Res Publica, and for its relationships
with the outside world. I care enough that I think that Nova Roma would be
better served by having a quaestor who was talented at mathematics, which I
am not. Neither are most classicists; Avitus is an exception. Would you
bar a classical scholar from a magistracy because he or she is not good at
math, but is good at other things assigned to different magistracies? Would
you want the RP to have a quaestor/quaestrix who lacked this talent? Whose
last acquaintance with mathematics was before you were born? You and I
discussed this, but you insisted that I seek the quaestura or some other
among the vigintisexviri posts, and were unbending on that despite my
considerable misgivings about my talents, which lean much more toward those
appropriate to the praetura than to the quaestura, though we admittedly have
some posts for quaestores which are not so heavily dependent on math.
However, there is no guarantee that I would be allowed to serve in such a
post; if the consules were unfriendly to me, they might well assign me to
one of the posts in which numbers were considerably more important than I
would prefer. Yes, I can do this; I got 96% on the NYS geometry Regents
exam, but the chances are your parents weren't married then...and that's one
of the reasons why I think I would not be a good diribitor, or a custos,
though the quaestura would be possible under favorable circumstances. As
Pindar said, ep'allois d'alloi megaloi, some are great in some things, and
others in others...but you would follow this with the rest of that line, 'to
d'eskhaton koryphountai basileusi: me:keti paptaine porsion'--but the
crowning summit is for kings; refrain from peering too far.

> Not in the least. She knows that what she's
> doing is totally contrary to all Roman law and tradition, and as far as she's
> concerned that's not a problem.

Yes, I do know this--and some other things, too. If I were better
adapted to the quaestura, I would indeed have sought it first, and may yet
do that. What I am doing is indeed contrary to all Roman law and tradition:
I'm a woman, and I'm seeking a magistracy. I'm a New Roman, and in New
Rome, we do things a little differently; if we followed ancient custom, we
would exclude women, use the ancient age limits and the ancient periods
between magistracies, and we would consider the aedilitas outside of the
cursus; moreover, we would add senate membership to the quaestura, as was
done in antiquity--in which case we might have quaestor candidates falling
out the metaphorical windows, rather than the present situation in which a
classics undergraduate and a rocket scientist are among those seeking that
office due to the dearth of candidates whose qualifications match the duties
of the office. Metellus is a good cybernaut, and so is Marinus, the latter
of whom is, as he notes, incredibly overqualified; both will be fine
quaestores, but cannot we find some others to pursue this office?

Yes, I would have preferred to follow the ancient cursus; yes, I am
enough of a realist to know wherein my talents lie. Yes, I know that you
and perhaps others consider this inappropriate, and yes, I consider it a bit
of a problem too. I am not deaf to your entreaties, nor blind to Roman
custom...but sometimes we must bend a little, as you may learn in time, and
sometimes ancient practice isn't going to work in the modern world.

>She said that it was all okay because the lex
> de whatever said she could run and some other people had told her she should
> run.

In accordance with our laws, those who have completed the rogatorship
may run for the praetorship. There are those who would like to bar this,
including at least one consular candidate, but that in turn would bar those
who are less talented at mathematics from other magistracies--and that would
be cutting our noses off in spite of our faces, especially since the vast
majority of classicists are not especially talented in the world of numbers.
If you don't want classicists--or at least FEMALE classicists--to occupy
these positions, then you will make a hard and fast rule that no one can
hold a magistracy except in the ancient cursus order--and you will lose
talent because of that, just as you will lose potential candidates who feel
that they cannot take auspices, if indeed that is a requirement, whether
this is due to their religious views or to the fact that they are blind or
severely visually impaired--a matter no one has bothered to consider.

You are mischaracterizing my words again, Corde.

> I complained to you yesterday that too many of our magistrates are
> prepared to use any excuse to avoid doing what a Roman magistrate would do.
> Here, regrettably, is a perfect example.

I don't think so.

>
> Thank goodness, we have two good and qualified candidates. Both T. Julius and
> C. Equitius have served as quaestores and aediles curules, and have
> demonstrated both their dedication to the mos majorum and their practical
> ability in office. I have every confidence that they will do the job very
> well if they are elected;

Their election would be guaranteed if there were no other
candidates--rather convenient. I share your opinion on one of the other
candidates, and know that the other is a fine person...but there are other
matters to consider.

When I threw my hat into the ring, we had one other candidate, one who
had already been praetor. He subsequently chose to seek the consulatus
instead. Should we have done without two praetores? At the tail end of the
candidacy period, people came out of the woodwork to run for office
(especially for the consulatus), but few dared to step forth earlier.

>and if they are not elected, then I don't know what
> this place is coming to.

It would be coming to the realization that we can bend a little.

>
> The remaining contests can be discussed briefly. I have nothing bad to say
> about any of the candidates for aediles curules, but I think I shall vote for
> Julia Caesar and T. Artoria: I recall being impressed by their work in various
> ludi, and I trust they will do more of the same. This year we have fewer
> candidates for quaestor than I can remember in any previous year, and I wonder
> whether that has anything to do with the fact that more and more people seem
> to get away with running for high office without being quaestor at all. Among
> the candidates I would, as usual, make special mention of Q. Metellus, a man
> worthy of his ancestors if ever I saw one. I also particularly look forward
> to seeing C. Curius' games as aedilis plebis; and the tribunician candidate
> who stands out to me is M. Curiatius, who's worked very energetically in the
> censorial office for the last couple of years and has also, by all accounts,
> been an effective governor of Hispania.

Corde, you have misunderstood at least some of what I said to you in
private, and fail to understand much of the rest; even you said that you
thought that I would make a good praetrix. Your only objection is that I
haven't been a quaestrix. On those grounds, many a Nova Roman magistrate
would not qualify for anything; as I said above, if we followed the ancient
rules, we wouldn't have been able to get enough candidates to run for
office. You don't approve of Piscinus' run for the consulatus, either, for
he hasn't been praetor...but perhaps he would be a fine consul in spite of
that; you simply won't consider anything other than the ancient rules. You
yourself are well below the ancient age requirements for quaestor, which,
according to my information, was 31 years, but you are quaestor, nonne?

>

Vale, et valete,

A. Tullia Scholastica

OSD C. Equitius Cato

Salvete omnes!

Hodie est pridie Kalendas Novembris; haec dies comitialis est.


"The war having been thus brought to a close, and rewards and
punishments having been meted out to each according to their deserts,
T. Manlius returned to Rome. There seems good reason for believing
that only the older men went out to meet him on his arrival, the
younger part of the population showed their aversion and detestation
for him not only then but all through his life. The Antiates made
incursions into the territories of Ostia, Ardea, and Solonia. Manlius'
health prevented him from prosecuting this war, so he nominated L.
Papirius Crassus as Dictator, and he named L. Papirius Cursor as his
Master of the Horse. No important action was taken by the Dictator
against the Antiates, though he had a permanent camp in their country
for some months. This year had been signalised by victories over many
powerful nations, and still more by the noble death of one consul, and
the stern, never-to-be-forgotten exercise of authority on the part of
the other. It was followed by the consulship of Titus Aemilius
Mamercinus and Q. Publilius Philo. They did not meet with similar
materials out of which to build a reputation, nor did they study the
interests of their country so much as their own or those of the
political factions in the republic. The Latins resumed hostilities to
recover the domain they had lost, but were routed in the Fenectane
plains and driven out of their camp. There Publilius, who had achieved
this success, received into surrender the Latin cities who had lost
their men there, whilst Aemilius led his army to Pedum. This place was
defended by a combined force from Tibur, Praeneste, and Velitrae, and
help was also sent from Lanuvium and Antium. In the various battles
the Romans had the advantage, but at the city itself, and at the camp
of the allied forces which adjoined the city, their work had to be
done all over again. The consul suddenly abandoned the war before it
was brought to a close, because he heard that a triumph had been
decreed to his colleague, and he actually returned to Rome to demand a
triumph before he had won a victory. The senate were disgusted at this
selfish conduct, and made him understand that he would have no triumph
till Pedum had either been taken or surrendered. This produced a
complete estrangement between Aemilius and the senate, and he
thenceforth administered his consulship in the spirit and temper of a
seditious tribune. As long as he was consul he perpetually traduced
the senate to the people, without any opposition from his colleague,
who himself also belonged to the plebs. Material for his charges was
afforded by the dishonest allocation of the Latin and Falernian domain
amongst the plebs, and after the senate, desirous of restricting the
consuls' authority, had issued an order for the nomination of a
Dictator to act against the Latins, Aemilius, whose turn it then was
to have the fasces, nominated his own colleague, who named Junius
Brutus as his Master of the Horse. He made his Dictatorship popular by
delivering incriminatory harangues against the senate and also by
carrying three measures which were directed against the nobility and
were most advantageous to the plebs. One was that the decisions of the
plebs should be binding on all the Quirites; the second, that measures
which were brought before the Assembly of centuries should be
sanctioned by the patricians before being finally put to the vote; the
third, that since it had come about that both censors could legally be
appointed from the plebs, one should in any case be always chosen from
that order. The patricians considered that the consuls and the
Dictator had done more to injure the State by their domestic policy
than to strengthen its power by their successes in the field." - Livy,
History of Rome 8.12

The Isia continues in honor of the Goddess Isis.


Today is, of course the celebration of the Eve of All Saints (or
Hallows) --- All Hallows' Eve --- Hallowe'en.

In the 5th century BC, in Celtic Ireland, the year officially ended on
October 31; the Celts believed that on the night before the new year,
the boundary between the worlds of the living and the dead became
blurred. On the night of October 31, they celebrated Samhain, when it
was believed that the ghosts of the dead returned to earth. In
addition to causing trouble and damaging crops, Celts thought that the
presence of the otherworldly spirits made it easier for the Druids, or
Celtic priests, to make predictions about the future. For a people
entirely dependent on the volatile natural world, these prophecies
were an important source of comfort and direction during the long,
dark winter.

During the celebration, the Celts wore costumes, typically consisting
of animal heads and skins, and attempted to tell each other's
fortunes. When the celebration was over, they re-lit their hearth
fires, which they had extinguished earlier that evening, from the
sacred bonfire to help protect them during the coming winter.

To commemorate the event, Druids built huge sacred bonfires, where the
people gathered to burn crops and animals as sacrifices to the Celtic
deities. By A.D. 43, Romans had conquered the majority of Celtic
territory. In the course of the four hundred years that they ruled the
Celtic lands, two festivals of Roman origin were combined with the
traditional Celtic celebration of Samhain.

The first was Feralia, a day in late October when the Romans
traditionally commemorated the passing of the dead. The second was a
day to honor Pomona, the Roman goddess of fruit and trees. The symbol
of Pomona is the apple and the incorporation of this celebration into
Samhain probably explains the tradition of "bobbing" for apples that
is practiced today on Halloween.

The custom of trick-or-treating is thought to have originated not with
the Irish Celts, but with a ninth-century European custom called
"souling." On November 2, All Souls' Day, early Christians would walk
from village to village begging for "soul cakes," made out of square
pieces of bread with currants. The more soul cakes the beggars would
receive, the more prayers they would promise to say on behalf of the
dead relatives of the donors. At the time, it was believed that the
dead remained in limbo for a time after death, and that prayer, even
by strangers, could expedite a soul's passage to heaven.


Valete bene...and Happy Hallowe'en!

Cato

SOURCES

Livy, All Hallow's Eve (www.theholidayspot.com/halloween/history.htm)
and (http://wilstar.com/holidays/hallown.htm)

M Moravius Piscinus Horatianus candidatus Quiritibus salutem plurimam
dicit: bene omnibus nobis.

My thanks go out to those have offered their public endorsements for
my candidacy:

Censores Gn. Equitius Marinus and M. Octavius Gracchus
Censoralis Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus
Consules G. Fabius Buteo Modianus and Pompeia Minucia Strabo
Praetor T. Octavius Pius Ahenobarbus
Aedilis Curulis T. Julius Sabinus
Aedilis Plebis Marca Hortensia Maior

...and to the many others who have lent their support:

Maximus gratias ago. Di Deaeque immortales vos bene ament.

Lucius Arminius Faustus and I first met while I was first teaching at
the Academis Thules. He was one of several who were urging me to
return into full citizenship in Nova Roma at the time. I enjoyed his
thoughtfulness, enthusiasm, honesty, and the knowldge he had to share
on the Republic. There is a depth of understanding that he brings
into any office; sometimes expressed poetically, at other times
philosophically, to the point or in long explanations. With the Gods
willing, should the lot fall to me to become one of our next
Consules, I shall be especially pleased to serve as colleague
alongside such a man as Lucius Arminius Fausutus.

Valete optime et vadete in pace Deorum



--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Lucius Arminius Faustus"
<lafaustus@...> wrote:

>
> Salve, excellent Modianus,
>
> I thank a lot your support, and agree with each word of you.

Piscinus is a

> admirably man. If I have the honor to be elected, the honor for me

will be a

> thousand times more if Piscinus shares the consulship as well.
>
> Consulship is a diplomatic magistrature, we must be flexible. On

tribunate,

> we could be loose-tongue, it is really the duty of the tribune.

That is why

> the own Religio Romana protects the tribunes.
>
> Both of us have become more mature on these years. Time indeed is

the father

> of truth.
>
> Vale,
> L. Arminius Faustus
> FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
>
>

SALVE ET SALVETE !

I want to thank you for your kind words. I will try to do the best
if I will be elected. Indeed, justice and common sense is my vision
about the job. I'm focused more to common sense and to find specific
ways to resolve all the problems with wisdom.

VALE ET VALETE,
IVL SABINVS

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Gnaeus Iulius Caesar"
<gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:

> Titus Iulius Sabinus:
> Sabinus is another man who will make an excellent Praetor. He

stands for justice and common sense, rare enough commodities on
their own.

> They are combined in this man. He has passion, yet controlled and
> focused. He knows how to motivate people. He will not flinch from
> difficult decisions.
> I have worked with Sabinus on a number of ventures and he too

shares with Cato a love of this res publica. He is determined and
will stick a job out to the end.

> To echo Cordus' sentiments if these two men are not elected as
> Praetors there is something drastically wrong with this place.

They will make an excellent team and their personalities are
distinct but a very good match.

Salve Iustina,

Your voter code is still good. Use it in this election too.

Vale,

-- Marinus

shiarraeltradaik wrote:

> salve
> I was given a voter code for the last election. Do I use this again or
> apply for a new one.
> Vale
> Marca Sempronia Iustina

Salvete omnes,

Aula Tullia Scholastica has been active in Nova Roma as a Rogatrix,
Scribe, Accensus, Interpreter, and Coryphaea in the Sodalitas Musarum.
She is brilliant, resourceful, cultivated and a wonderful friend. I donÂ’t
know many Nova Romans who could match her devotion and dedication to our
Republic. Somebody just wrote that Nova Roma has a hidden treasure in
Scholastica, and I agree. She will be a superb Praetor.

I also believe that Titus Iulius Sabinus is an excellent choice for the
Praetorship.

I'll vote for the them, and I urge all Nova Romans to do so, in the best
interests of our Republic.

Valete optime,

M•IVL•SEVERVS

PROPRÆTOR•PROVINCIƕMEXICO
ROGATOR
INTERPRETER
SCRIBA•CENSORIS•GEM
MVSÆVS•COLLEGII•ERATOVS•SODALITATIS•MVSARVM
SOCIVS•CHORI•MVSARVM

--
_______________________________________________
Get your free email from http://www.linuxmail.org

Powered by Outblaze


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Pompeia Minucia Strabo Consul Quiritibus Novae Romae S.P.D.

I wish to extend a word or two of endorsement of the following
candidates for office:

CURULE AEDILE

Please consider the experience of Tita Artoria Marcella and Iulia
Caesar Cytheris Aege. These two citizens have worked relentlessly
as part of the Cohorte Iulius Sabinus Curule Aedile with respect to
the Ludi and Magna Mater initiatives. They have gained alot of
relevant experience and I am more than confident they would not
disappoint you as Curule Aediles. Best of luck at the cista, and
might I say that I have enjoyed the ludi and your particular
contributions to the games.

Another candidate I approve for this position is Quintus Valerius
Callidius, our current webmaster. He has worked very hard at his
duties and displays a good work ethic of commitment and timeliness.
He is often a magistrate's right hand man when it comes to
publishing important edicts such as tax edicts, senatus consulta,
providing and maintaining links through which taxes and donations
may be electronically remitted, assisting with election cista, etc.
etc. He is attentive, good spirited and creative. I could write 20
paragraphs on what his current position entails. The bottom line
is, I am sure Callidius will lend the time and talent it takes to be
a good Curule Aedile.


QUAESTORES

I wish all candidates well at the cista. I have known and worked
with Equitius Marinus Censor for some time, and he does not need an
endorsement from me or anyone for Quaestor I should think, but
rather, a thanks for taking up this inportant job, after several
years already spend at time-consuming magistracies. His
qualifications are not reasonably a question.

I also encourage approval of Q. Caeceilius Metellus Pius Postumianus
for Quaestor.

Quintus Iulius Probus and Gaius Marius Maior, though I have not had
alot of personal contact with them, come highly recommended, are by
law qualified for the position of Quaestor, and I ask for your
consideration of these citizens who are willing to serve the
republic.

DIRIBITORES

Titus Pontius Silanus and Marcus Arminius Maior: Thank you for
taking up this responsibility. We are in good hands here, quirites.

Valete et Gratias

Valetudo quod fortuna omnes;

The Centuria Praerogativa for
the upcoming election will be XIII (13).

Once the voting in the Comitia opens,
please follow the voting schedule as set
forth: the Centuria Praerogativa starts
things off, then the Centuries of the
First Class (I - XV) join in and then the
voting opens up to all.

This will help your Diribitors get the
vote counted in a manner more sure to
bring a quick, accurate report once the
Cista are closed.

Gratias

Stephanus Ullerius Venator Piperbarbus
Diribitor

Salve Romans

This post mainly applies to those citizens in North America but if
your national Archaeological society has a similar program you might
try and do the same ( unless you already are.)

The Archaeological Institute of America host FREE local lectures
through their local societies. Not all are on Rome but a number are.

"The AIA serves the non-specialist public in two principal ways:
through its magazine Archaeology, and through the lecture program.
Each academic year between September and May, Institute headquarters
in Boston sends three professional archaeologists to lecture to each
of its local societies. Because the local societies are composed of
members of the general public as well as professional archaeologists,
the lecture program provides a unique opportunity for interested non-
professionals to meet practicing archaeologists and to learn of new
discoveries.

AIA lectures are free and bring news of the latest archaeological
discoveries to the public. AIA local societies, located throughout
the United States and Canada, integrate the lectures provided to them
by Institute headquarters with locally sponsored lectures and events.
Contact your nearest local society for more information.
Questions regarding the AIA Lecture Program may be sent to Becky
Donahue, Lecture Coordinator."

I have posted the information on the lecture to be held in
Mediatlantica and we will going to some with other Nova Romans with
dinner after.

To find the lectures in your are check this map:

http://www.archaeological.org/webinfo.php?page=10050

For example this is the listing for Vancouver, BC

Wednesday, November 29, 2006 at 7:30 PM

Elizabeth Bartman, Independent Scholar
Henry Blundell and his Classical Marbles: Archaeology in the Era of
the Grand Tour
Where: TBA

Tuesday, March 06, 2007 at 7:30 PM

Deborah Carlson, Texas A&M University (McCann/Taggart Lecture
A Monumental Cargo: The Roman Column Wreck at Kizilburun, Turkey


Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus

SALVE ET SALVETE !

Honestly, I'm very happy to read the Consul Pompeia Minucia
endorsement. That because she is a special person for me. We worked
together in two Cohorts and in MMP. The result is life time
friendship and mutually respect.

VALE ET VALETE,
IVL SABINVS

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
<pompeia_minucia_tiberia@...> wrote:

> Titus Iulius Sabinus is a zealous citizen whom I've had the great
> pleasure of knowing for nearly two years. He has been a fantastic
> Curule Aedile, attentive to both his duties of hosting Ludi, and in
> the custodianship of the Magna Mater project. His enthusiasm

naturally motivates his cohortes to become active and involved. He
worked with his predecessor Lucius Iulius Sulla Curule Aedile in the
Magna Mater effort, where I first met him.

>
> Sabine has served well as my Consular Accensus, and he, too, has
> demonstrated a good knowledge of the law in his discussions with

me on this situation and that within NR. He is good to remind me
well in advance..."Have you noticed that this has to be attended to,
Po?" And he will have the link to the laws ready for me to
inspect....just so helpful and knowledgeable on the laws and
procedures. He has also served as Scribe to the Praetores this
year. He serves as Governor of Dacia. He is virtuous and will
deliver justice, and he would work well with his Praetoral partner
and the rest of the magistrature of NR.

SALVE ET SALVETE !

You have the same respect from my part, Magistra Scholastica. We
done great things together and my job from this year represent the
contribution of my Cohort (the first Pia Fidelis in NR), without
doubts. There you weren't involved only in the games sections. You
were an historical and juridical advisor, too. Thank you.

VALE ET VALETE,
IVL SABINVS



--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "A. Tullia Scholastica"
<fororom@...> wrote:

> > ATS: Let me add that T. Iulius Sabinus has worked very,

very hard as aedilis curulis, something I know firsthand from being
in his cohors. He is not one to cut and run when the going gets
rough, or one to lose his temper.

> > He has done a wonderful job almost singlehandedly, and I trust

that the citizenry enjoyed all of the ludi he superintended.

SALVE ET SALVETE !

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, M•IVL•SEVERVS
<marcusiuliusseverus@...> wrote:

> I also believe that Titus Iulius Sabinus is an excellent choice for

the Praetorship.>>>

Thank you for consideration, Iuli Severe.

VALE ET VALETE,
IVL SABINVS

Salve A. Tullia Scholastic et Salvete Omnes:

I have deleted your graciously delivered response to A. Apollonius Cordus...not because it was a bad read, but for brevity. There are 51 Centuries total who will judge each candidate by virtue of their qualifications, among other factors. I am sure that no exceptions will be made by those evaluating your candidacy. They will not look at your name and think "Oh, a mere vingintisexvir, whilst completely dismissing your qualifications. This is a forum of politicking, blatent contradiction, and at times, what could be called 'attack poodling' How much effect this has on the reasoned opinions of the centuries I have to wonder.

I think we can chalk the message of #46819 where Cordus is chastising you for running for Praetor as just 'Cordus being Cordus' and his desire for a strict adherance to the ancient cursus/mos maiorum..

He is endorsing his candidates of choice because they have held the appropriate offices according to the cursus of old and in his post he details why. You have not held the office of Quaestor or Curule Aedile and, despite this being ok by NR law, it is apparently *abominable*. The fact that some candidates he has endorsed are engaging in continuatio, equally against the ancient mos...but I guess we'll worry about this aspect of the ancient mos some other time.

Cordus is committed to an impartial and strict application of the ancient Mos Maiorum. Any other way is not acceptable. Atleast he seemed quite committed in the wee stages of the election. I'll show you. In #45789 of Sept. 24 this year he is discussing the ancient practise of discouraging 'continuatione'; that to run for consecutive magistracies is quite unacceptable as it deviates from the ancient mos...to the extent where he offers this: "having bad magistrates *may* make our republic less Roman, but ignoring the mos majorum *will* and *must* make our republic less Roman. To my mind, therefore, sticking to the rules is more important than keeping this individual or that out of office"

So, Scholastica, our Cordus is merely sticking by his guns. This is why he addressed the candidacies of those running for consecutive magistracies with the same fervor and conviction by which he decried your bide for Praetor....ahhh, no, wait a sec....Cordus didn't do that at all......he *endorsed* candidates running for consecutive offices...but I thought it was better to have *bad* magistrates (his word, not mine) than to deviate from the Mos Maiorum. ??? I'm so confused.

Cordus, you must understand, is committed to enforcing the ancient mos maiorum not by legislation but by public opinion and peer pressure. Consequently it is a matter of appropriate decorum I guess for him to appraise your candidacy as he did. We have no legions so we have to use electronic 'peer pressure' I guess (better that way, really) Let me show you some more: In 45750 we read that "it as public opinion and peer pressure which enforced the rule against continuatio for a large portion of life during the old republic, not legislation, and there is absolutely no reson why such pressure should not enforce the same rule here and now"

Cordus is committed to an *impartial* enforcement of the mos maiorum through peer pressure and public opinion...to continue the above sentence of the same message 45750:

" so long as we have the courage to apply it without fear or favour"

And again, that is why he publicly chastised candidates running for consecutive magistracies.........ohh...but wait a sec; no he didn't......I'm still confused.

So, the bottom line is, according to Cordus, despite his personal endorsements or rebuttals of many candidates, several of you are being naughty.

But again...I think this is just our Cordus, being our Cordus. A bit of peer pressure, but I doubt it will have much overall influence on the 'public opinion' he speaks of. The people of Nova Roma can think and the people can speak. ...as Romans.


Valete
Pompeia




---------------------------------
Want to start your own business? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

SALVETE QUIRITES !

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "pompeia_minucia_tiberia"
<pompeia_minucia_tiberia@...> wrote:

> Pompeia Minucia Strabo Consul Quiritibus Novae Romae S.P.D.
> I wish to extend a word or two of endorsement of the following
> candidates for office:
>
> CURULE AEDILE
>
> Please consider the experience of Tita Artoria Marcella and Iulia
> Caesar Cytheris Aege. These two citizens have worked relentlessly
> as part of the Cohorte Iulius Sabinus Curule Aedile with respect

to the Ludi and Magna Mater initiatives. They have gained alot of

> relevant experience and I am more than confident they would not
> disappoint you as Curule Aediles. Best of luck at the cista, and
> might I say that I have enjoyed the ludi and your particular
> contributions to the games.>>>

Near honored Consul, I want to please you Quirites to take in
consideration the Aediles Team candidacy.

Tita Artoria Marcella impressed me all the year. She had done at
high level her duties. Near that, in her statement she demonstrates
initiative.
She has a great personality and she will be an excellent aedile.

Iulia Caesar Cytheris is my co- fellow from Dacia and I'm happy to
see how citizens from my area are ready to serve. With your
goodwill, she can demonstrate that.

VALETE,
IVL SABINVS

Valetudo quod fortuna omnes;

The voting is occuring at a good pace!

Only a few each invalid and duplicate votes.

Ballot # 21013, cast on 10/30/2006 at approx 07:30 GMT, used the
invalid Voter Code: YQM128

Ballot # 21040 and 21041, cast on 10/31/2006 at approx 00:30 GMT, used
the invalid Voter Code: SP0351. Possibly: SPO351 ("oh" rather than
"zero")?

The duplicates were all identical, so no tally change will be needed.

So, thus far we have no actual problems.

In amicus - Venator - Diribitor

Q. Caecilius Metellus pont. Ap. Claudio sal.

What you (and Lucretius Agricola) have said is certainly a better way to
say things, and it certainly changes the perception of things quite a
bit. So it seems that, from my seat, an apology is in order for my
misinterpretation of what you meant.

There is certainly nothing wrong in role-playing things to fulfill one's
duty to the State. While I would like that all of us here were
believers in the Roman gods (:-)), it certainly isn't a requirement, and
I wouldn't push to make it one. So long as someone is willing and
capable of executing the duties of their office, and willing and capable
of doing so well, I all in favor of it.

Salvete Quirites,

I've missed a lot of messages which came in between late September and
now, due to some problems with my former ISP. But now that I've
gotten things resolved, I've been going back through some of the
messages, and I'd like to respond to this one.

Marca Hortensia aed. pl. proposed this idea back in late September:

> 2. This idea led me to another. As most of us want lararia
> but don't have the skill to make one. Why doesn't NR go into the
> business of making them: miniature Roman temples. There are plenty
> of pagans & Rome & Greece lovers who would buy them - increasing our
> treasury.

I'm not sure how many are willing to do this, but, as I believe I
mentioned before, I've been trying to work with the Roman Temple mold
from Hirst Arts, which can be found at:
http://www.hirstarts.com/temple/temple.html

He's made these for fantasy architecture and gaming, but I still find
them a perfectly suitable method of working this out, albeit a little
time-consuming. If we do ever give more serious consideration to
going down the path of making lararia (and perhaps someone in our
Macellum might be willing to do so), I would recommend looking into
building this mold as a possibility. I'm not sure of what legal
aspects would be involved, but again, I only put it up as a possibility.

Valete Optime,

Q. Caecilius Metellus

VICESIMA QUARTA
The Newsletter of
LEGION XXIV - MEDIA ATLANTIA

OCTOBER 2006

Gallio Velius Marsallas / George Metz
Praefectus - Commander
13 Post Run - Newtown Square PA 19073-3014
610-353-4982
legionxxiv@... www.legionxxiv.org

Commilitones:

AFTER ACTION - COLUMBUS DAY PARADE OCT 9
Legion XXIV and Legion III Cyrenaica were engaged to participate as a Roman Legionary contingent to march in the Parade up 5th Avenue, on Monday, Oct 9. Septimus Severius Salvatoriensis Caecus (Sal Nardozzi) and C. Artorius Magnus (Joe DiGrazia) joined with the Commander and 10 troopers from Legion III to take part in this memorable campaign. Sal and Joe met-up and came together to the Vince Lombardy service plaza at the top end of the NJ Tpke, where they transferred their kit onto the Commander's baggage-train. The assembled Legion then proceeded over the George Washington Bridge and down the West-Side Highway to 45th Street and 5th Avenue in the mighty Province of Manhattan. After some difficulty, we arrived at our assigned place for the Parade and the Commander outfitted some tyro-recruits provided by the Parade organizer.
Step-off time for the parade was 12-Noon, but as could be expected, our unit/division did not move until circa 1PM. So just like it has been for all armies from time in memorial, it was a "hurry-up and wait" situation. The Parade route was about 1.75 miles long, just a "warm-up" march after breakfast for Roman Army Legionaries. The movement of the Parade was very sluggish and it took a good two hours to move from 45th to 80th Streets.
Septimus Severius served as the Aquilifer to carry the Aquila/Eagle for the assembled III and XXIV Legions, while C. Artorius bore the Vexillum for Legion XXIV, along with your Commander carrying the Legion's Signum Standard. We were joined by the Vexillifer of Legion III, and as such, we formed an impressive front rank for the legionaries marching three abreast behind us, with the Centurio of Legion III, Mike Heenan, leading the way. The assembled Legions met with much cheering and applause from the thousands of on-lookers, three and four deep along the sides of the Great 5th Avenue Apia. Cameras were clicking and camcorders were whirring as we proudly displayed the Glory of Ancient Rome.
This parade in NYC is the single biggest celebration of Italian culture and history, not only in New York and across the nation, but also in the world. The Parade is televised in New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and internationally across Italy and parts of Europe. After completing the march, we and the tyros piled into taxicabs for the return to our baggage-train, with the signum and vexillum standards sticking out the rear window, as they were too long to fit into the cab. The successful campaign into the Manhattan Province concluded with a well deserved meal at the Lombardy Plaza Capona. It is expected that Legions III and XXIV will be making a similar incursion into Manhattan for next year's Columbus Day Parade.

AFTER ACTION - DEFENSE OF FORT NO. 4 - OCT 14 - 15
Members of Legions XXIV and III were "Called to Arms" for the 2nd Annual Time Line event at the Fort at No. 4 in Charlestown, NH on Oct 14, 15, 2006. The Fort is a very reenactor friendly site, scenic, has good facilities and always a lot of fun. The Fort No. 4 event was a nice but rather low key with a light turn-out of the public. Your Commander and four legionaries from Leg-III turned-out and set-up an encampment outside the northern walls of the Fort. The Legion's Engine of Terror was emplaced nearby to repel any barbarian incursions toward our camp or the Fort. The weather was chilly and breezy. It was not too bad on sunny Saturday, but Sunday turned-out to be cloudy and windy and it became rather cold at times and the public apparently felt the same way.
A group of western riders entertained us with an on-going display of their pistol shooting and horse riding skills. Unfortunately, they had to retire from the field after two of their riders were injured by a fall and a collision with the fort barricade. An interesting assemblage of medieval Polish reenactors were camped near us. They had an unusual round tent and displayed an impressive set of armor with high wing-like attachments mounted to the back of the body cuirass, which they said were intended to spook the horses of their adversaries. Several members of the public were afforded the opportunity to try-on the armor set. We were also treated to some tasty Polish food cooked over their camp fire. Although the number of visitors was not great, we did educate those who came on the glory and heritage of ancient Rome.

AFTER ACTION - PA REN FAIRE - SCOUT TRAINING
Septimus Severius Salvatoriensis Caecus (Sal Nardozzi), one of our newer troopers has been active campaigning for the glory of Rome. We commend his actions most highly. The two reports of his endeavors follow:

It is with great pleasure and pride I report to you at this time the success of the informal mission undertaken on October 1 to the PA Renaissance Faire located at Mount Hope Winery and Estates.
Accompanied by allied barabrians Gijchar Gonnulf and Annora of the Axe (Weapon and armor smiths extraordinaire of The Lonely Mountain Forge) a reconnaissance was undertaken by a lone milles of the Legio. Truly it must have been long since last the Shire there was visited by the glory of Rome. A single simple soldier was successful in displaying to the arrayed Celts, Gauls, Germans, and others gathered for the Oktoberfest the grandeur and glory that is Roma, Urbs Aeternam. Many were the pueri and puellae who posed with that soldier; many more were the adults who approached and questioned the soldier concerning his arms and equipment. Some even asked for advice on how to begin their own military sojourns through Rome's legions. All and sundry were given the Commander's contact information ini answer to requests for Roman presence at functions and affairs. A few even turned out to be members of certain Fraternal organizations in which the soldier likewise held membership and much was discussed about a Roman presence at a Table Lodge to be held next year at the Faire.
Although some were heard to comment in the spirit of the times "Bloody Romans" as the soldier passed, there was but a single light casualty which occurred while marching over treacherous ground. But the barbers assure that there will be no impediment to continued participation in either the ongoing combat drills and practices and battles taking place weekly nor in the upcoming Legion official presence at the Columbus Day Parade in Manhattan.

It is with great pleasure that I once again report to you the success of my small mission of October 10th.
Accompanied once again by allied barbarians Gichar Gronnulf and Annora of the Axe a sojourn was made to the Harry and Jeanette Weinberger Scout Training Center on Montage Mountain Road in Moosic, PA.
There this simple milles successfully displayed the typical weapons, clothing and armor worn by a 1st C. A.D. solider.
A further informative talk was had with the thirty-odd adults and a few youth who were present for the leadership meeting, whose purpose it was to provide ideas for the various troop and den leaders to take back to their home units and expand upon for
ideas and activities.
Again the trooper in question explained the names and meanings and purpose of all the various items brought, even displaying the common mistakes or inaccuracies that can be encountered when purchasing gear instead of making one's own. Live steel was drawn and shown to the participants and the designs of both the gladius hispaniensis and the pugio were shown and the
purpose behind those designs explained and discussed.
Further, after the informative talk, which including intelligent questions by both youth and adults, a rattan fighting demonstration was undertaken with the allied barbarians and the glory and power of Rome through her citizen-soldiers was again well demonstrated in both an effective and humorous manner. The rattan fight demonstration was also utilized to show the difference between historical Roman soldiery in their armor and weapons and even to an extent fighting techniques as juxtaposed to what was done today in rattan fighting for both safety and effectiveness.
After the fighting demonstration, a further question and answer period was had and several brave civilians came up and were outfitted briefly in the arms and armor of a Roman legionaire to allow them to feel the weight and heft of the various items. Additionally a discussion was also held about the difference in size of the average Roman legionaire from that time period as
opposed to the much larger size of the average person today.
I am proud to correspond as well that requests for further demonstrations were received and may be answered affirmatively as time permits; of course the soldier in question has other duties to perform that may limit his availability!

Additionally, when reporting in electronic dispatches to the Barony of the Endless Hills about the success of the Parade Mission undertaken on Columbus Day just past, a request for a Roman presence in the St. Patrick's Day parade to be held in Scranton in March 2007 as part of the Endless Hills marching and/or fighting contingent was received and I pass the request on for consideration by the legion on a voluntary basis.

Vale! SPQR
Septimus Severius Salvatoriensis Caecus
Sal Nardozzi

TEUTOBERG VALD FILM EVENT
The National Geographic Society says their production schedule has been put "on hold". So we don't know when their planned Teutoberg Forest battle reenactment will be done. Stay Tuned.

AN ACTIVE NEW MILES !
Salvatori Nardozzi (Septimus Severius Salvatoriensis Caecus), one of our newer and most active members, continues to be quite active. He calls himself a "simple soldier" and he has been engaging in heavy rattan fighting on a regular basis for several months. He has now been successfully authorized in weapon and shield combat form so that he can engage in said combat style at official events such as the upcoming baronial Investiture on 11 November 2006. He was told by others in the organization that his authorization was very quick in time frame from the beginning of his martial endeavors to final authorization. When asked by Scouts and others in the past about why he I fights, he always replies the same thing. "I fight for sport, for honor, for fun. And for the glory of Rome". Well Done Septimus Severius!

EQUIPMENT FOR SALE
Mike Cope of Legion XX may still have some pieces of gear for sale. Contact him at vergil96@... for details and haggling.
All items are well-maintained and in great condition, and "Legio XXIV Approved".
This could be a good opportunity for our newer members to get some good equipment at reasonable cost.
--Corbridge type A lorica segmentata made by Joe Piela of Lonely Mountain Forge, $500.
--Museum Replicas Pompeii gladius, $350. Mike replaced the whole hilt and added openwork decoration to the scabbard. Second from right in this photo:
http://www.larp.com/legioxx/gladii3.jpg
--Mainz/Fulham type gladius, prototype blade from Albion Armorers, hilt and scabbard by Mike, $250.

REENACTORS WANTED
Hyphenated-Productions is currently pitching a major network a new television show about REENACTORS. They are looking for five to ten energetic, vivacious, gregarious, young or old, male or female enthusiastic REENACTORS who are not afraid to represent their battle in the homes of thousands of television viewers. If you fit the above attributes and feel you'd make the best choice, please email a select group of pictures (REQUIRED to be considered), any video if available, a brief bio, your REENACT-ing preferences and any contact information. http://hyphenated-productions@...
Taylor Marshall-Green & Eva Nagorski - Hyphenated ­ Productions 310 E. 46th St. 11B New York, NY 10017
hyphenatedproductions@...
212-682-2070 (phone/fax)

UPCOMING CAMPAIGNS for LEGION XXIV and OTHER EVENTS for 2007

*** March 17 Possible participation on St. Patricks Day Parade in Scranton PA

*** Mar 22 - 25 Defense of Fort Lafe, Lafe, AR a total immersion event, closed to the public, with a gate house, towers, walls and bunk house.

Thanking you for your continued support of Legion XXIV, I remain;

Yours in the Bonds of Ancient Rome

Gallio / George




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Q. Caecilius Metellus Quiritibus salutem.

Well the time has come again for us to make our determinations as to
who shall next take the helm of things here, and whose services will
assist those who take the helm in doing so. It just wouldn't be
election time without endorsements, and I don't intend to refrain from
giving mine.

I must particularly thank those who have seen it fit to lend me their
endorsements. As I said in my announcement of candidacy, I was not
seeking any endorsements, but I am certainly not ungrateful for those
which have been given. For my own candidacy, my purpose is to serve,
and I have no agenda to push but that. I intend only to serve the
Gods of Rome and the People of Rome, so long as you and they allow me
to do so. But enough of the broccoli, I think I'll go ahead and give
you all the meat and potatoes (except Agricola; you get pasta!).

As has been noted already, the Censor race is uncontested. However, I
still feel C. Buteo worthy of my endorsement, and so he shall have it.

I have had the pleasure of working with C. Buteo for some time now,
since my early days as a citizen. I also have the pleasure of being
among his colleagues in the Pontificate (and the honour of having had
him oversee my inauguration), and assisting him in a number of other
roles. I know him to be objective, as I know our Censor M. Octavius
Gracchus to be as well, and I believe that he will maintain his
frankness and objectivity, both of which are necessary in this office,
as Censor. For those reasons, I endorse as Censor C. Fabius Buteo
Modianus.

The consular race is a bit more difficult for me. Here we have quite
a few candidates from quite a few different backgrounds, and different
visions in each of them. There are good reasons to vote for each of
them, and there are good reasons not to vote for each of them, as have
come out throughout the past few weeks. In this race, though, there
is one candidate who I personally would like to endorse.

While I have seen more voices raised recently against him than for
him, I will raise my voice in favor of Flavius Vedius Germanicus. It
is true that he has resigned from office previously, but so have a
number of our magistrates from previous years, myself included.
However, of all the candidates for this office, I find no one more
qualified to lead than one of the founders, and I see the clearest
proposals for the coming year in this campaign. None of us can see
what the future holds, and the future may hold cause (regardless of by
whose perception it is) for one's resignation from office, no matter
which office it may be.

As you ponder, Quirites, who will receive your vote in the consular
race, I can not ask you to forget the past. However, I do ask you to
consider who is best able to lead this nation to greatness. In
considering that, the first person to come to mind is none other than
Flavius Vedius Germanicus, and for that reason, he will receive my vote.

The praetorian race is also a difficult one for me, and this too for a
variety of different reasons. So in considering my vote for praetor,
I have tried to determine, as best I can, who I feel will best make
objective decisions, remain impartial, and uphold the duties of the
office. I have little to say against T. Iulius Sabinus, who I hope
will be able to do all of the above. My limited experience with him,
however, is the only thing which prevents my endorsement of him. I
also have nothing to say against A. Tullia Scholastica. I do, though,
have volumes to say in favor of C. Equitius Cato, to whom I give my
endorsement.

Of all the candidates presented in this election, if my endorsements
were to be limited to only one individual, it would go to C. Cato. I
am sure many of you know that he and I do not always agree on every
topic, but no one has made more efforts, in my opinion, to understand
all points of view and to be understood by all than our current curule
aedile Caius Cato. His unwavering and unimpeachable dedication to our
Republic can be seen most regularly in his assiduous daily postings,
and despite our differences in religious belief, I have no doubt that
Cato will perform whatever duties are attendant to his office. I feel
confident in expecting nothing but great things from Equitius Cato,
and only if Aulus Cordus were running against him would he not receive
my endorsement. In this race, Quirites, there is none more worthy of
the office of Praetor than C. Equitius Cato, and I urge you all to
vote in his favor.

The position of Aedile of the Plebs has been, over the years, perhaps
the most difficult to staff. This year, we have but one candidate
willing to fill the position, C. Curius Saturninus. Not only does he
carry my endorsement, he too carries my gratitude. This position
seems to be a forgotten position, yet it is, in my view, the more
important of the plebeian magistracies. There are no special powers
which come with this office, such as the right of veto, but this
office serves a greater role. The Aedile of the Plebs serves the
great protectress of the plebeian order, Ceres, moreso than its
Tribunician colleagues. He serves the People, as well, in providing
not only entertainment, but also in helping to ensure that no divine
anger falls on the Roman plebeians. For my own part, I am not only
proud to be a plebeian, I am also proud to have C. Curius among that
order, and I am equally confident in the abilities of C. Curius to
execute the duties of the Plebeian Aedileship with honour, dignity,
efficiency, expediency, and devotion. All of these qualities are the
qualities most needed in a magistrate, and these are all qualities
found in C. Curius Saturninus, whom I feel we should elect as our Aedile.

Well, I shall cease my endorsements there. That isn't to say that
some standing in offices are not worthy of endorsement, however, I'm
sure some of you would just as soon rather I shut my big mouth!

Optime valete in pace Deorum,

Q. Caecilius Metellus Postumianus
Candidate for Quaestor
Pontifex
Fetialis
et al.

Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus Q. Caecilio Metello salutem dicit

Very well! In the spirit of Peace, Concord, Clemency, Patience, and
Nobility I shall refrain from responding to the latest post addressed to me
by Flavius Vedius Germanicus. I will, however, state it here that if anyone
is interested in my position/reaction to anything raised by Germanicus in
his latest post that I would be glad to address it to them in private.
Perpetuating a conflict between Germanicus and myself simply to perpetuate
it is counterproductive.

Vale:

Gaius Fabius Buteo Modianus
Consul

On 10/31/06, Q. Caecilius Metellus <sapientissimi@...> wrote:
>
> Q. Caecilius Metellus Fetialis Fl. Germanico C. Buteoni Praetoribus
> Quiritibus salutem plurimam dicit.
>
> While I recognise the Roman tradition of heated argument in the Forum,
> let us not forget the equally Roman values of Peace, Concord, Clemency,
> Patience, and above all, Nobility.
>
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salve Aule Apolloni,

> This may seem to some of you an excessively stern reaction. After all,
> to someone who's not familiar with Roman constitutional rules it's not at
> all obvious that running for praetor without holding any lower magistracy
> is a big deal. Fair enough. It's not something you'd expect everyone to know.
> So I wrote to A. Tullia to explain that it was a big deal and that if she
> valued the mos majorum she should withdraw and run for some lower office.

What do you think of persons under thirty serving as Quaestor?

(Or are rules only for other people?)

Aula Tullia Scholastica is a splendid candidate for Praetor, and I intend
to vote for her - and no other.

Aula Tullia Scholastica has been a hard worker for Nova Roma for years,
in the Censores' office, as Rogator, teaching Latin in the Academia Thules,
providing translations promptly whenever asked, and assisting the Praetores
with list moderation.

Furthermore, as she is a classicist and Latin teacher with connections
to others in that field, electing Aula Tullia will bring credibility to
Nova Roma in a way that no other candidate can.

I prefer to vote for people based on qualifications and character. By
qualifications I don't mean how much purple ink is on someone's album
civium page, but by what they've shown they can do; and Aula Tullia
Scholastica is a fine, hard-working, dedicated citizen. I've met
Scholastica; I like and respect her; I would be proud to see her as
a senior magistrate of Nova Roma and a member of its Senate.

Valete, M. Octavius Gracchus, Censor.

--
Marcus Octavius Gracchus
octavius@... * http://www.graveyards.com

-"Apes don't read philosophy."
-"Yes they do, Otto, they just don't understand it! Let me correct
you on a few things: Aristotle was not Belgian. The central message of
Buddhism is not 'every man for himself'. And the London Underground is
not a political movement! Those are all mistakes. I looked them up."
-from "A Fish Called Wanda"

Salvete,

I heartily concur, and will gladly see the campaign turn back to ideas
rather than personalities. Those interested in my ideas regarding the
Consulship, and how I would intend to approach it should I be so graced,
are invited to read my collected statements on my campaign website, below.

I apologize to all for allowing myself to be drawn into such public
verbal fisticuffs. I should not have risen to the provocation offered.

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus
Pater Patriae
Consular
Senator

http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Flavius_Vedius_Germanicus_(Election_MMDCCLIX)


Q. Caecilius Metellus wrote:

>Q. Caecilius Metellus Fetialis Fl. Germanico C. Buteoni Praetoribus
>Quiritibus salutem plurimam dicit.
>
>While I recognise the Roman tradition of heated argument in the Forum,
>let us not forget the equally Roman values of Peace, Concord, Clemency,
>Patience, and above all, Nobility.
>
>There is nothing wrong about having feelings toward someone, and there
>is equally nothing wrong in expressing the fact that one has such
>feelings toward another person. But rather than bring it into the
>public sphere, and fill the inboxes of countless subscribers with
>nothing more than the exchanges between two people about their
>differences of opinion, would it not be better, and more productive, to
>take things into the private sphere, and deal with them calmly,
>rationally, and, most importantly, as Romans?
>
>As a Fetial it is my duty to work to maintain the peace and just
>dealings between ourselves and other nations. I see it also as my duty
>to work to maintain the same amongst ourselves, because, in my
>professional opinion, one can *not* even begin to hope to maintain peace
>and justice between nations if one's own nation can not maintain peace
>among itself.
>
>With that said, both as a Fetial and as a Pontifex of _this_ nation, I
>request that we observe a day of thanksgiving on the Nones of this
>coming month, to thank all the Gods (whomever you so worship), privately
>and publicly, for those things which have so benevolently been given us.
> And at the same time, I ask that, so far as this forum goes, we
>observe a day of silence, in recognition of our ancestors and the great
>losses they suffered in the last years of the Republic.
>
>We have only just embarked on what I believe, and what I feel we all
>believe, can and will be a great thing: not simply the reinstitution of
>the Roman state, but also the virtues which made it great, and made the
>people which comprised it great as well. It does nothing but harm to us
>to argue at such lengths over things so personally as we do now. It is
>good to debate things, and to consider them deeply, but the absolute
>worst thing we can do right now is to launch personal attacks against
>each other. Now is the time for working together to bring the dream of
>Rome into a reality, not simply in these light-boxes which sit on our
>desks, but in our homes, in our families, in our communities, and, best
>and most of all, in a fully landed autonomous state. This latter thing
>will not ever be achieved if we continue on this path. It must stop now!
>
>Citizens, I do not have the authority, nor would I even want the
>authority, to enforce what I have requested with law. So I leave it to
>all of you who choose to do so to join with me in this thanksgiving.
>Let us all remember the things we have, the things that have been lost
>over the years, and the things we can make happen over the coming years.
> Let us work together to make those things happen. Let us take a step
>back from things and shed new light on them, that perhaps we can see
>what wasn't there before. One can never see the beauty of the forest if
>we concentrate on the worst parts of any given tree.
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Salve,

Yeah, Faustus help Faustus to a faustus consulship!

Valete bene in pacem deorum,
L. Arminius Faustus

FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!

2006/10/31, Fausta Martiana Gangalia Minervalis <Minervalis@...>:

>
> Salve Faustus,
>
> It's also a great cognomen. :-)
>
> Faustus for Consul!
>
> Vale,
> F.Martiana
>
>
> On 10/30/06, Lucius Arminius Faustus <lafaustus@...> wrote:
> >
> > Salve,
> >
> > Uhh... beautiful pronomen...
> >
> > Vale,
> > L. Arminius Faustus
> >
> > FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
> >
> > 2006/10/30, Fausta Martiana Gangalia Minervalis <Minervalis@...
> <Minervalis%40gmail.com>
> > >:
> > >
> > > Salvete,
> > >
> > > I looked up my information in the Album Civium, and saw that I need to
> > > make
> > > a correction to my "personal website". Unfortunately, I couldn't find
> a
> > > way
> > > to do it. Does anyone know how to edit the information on the Album
> > Civium
> > > page? Will I have to create an account with Wikipedia?
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance for any advice. :-)
> > >
> > > Valete,
> > >
> > > F. Martiana
> > >
> > > --
> > > Fausta Martiana Gangalia Minervalis
> > >
> > > "Leve fit, quod bene fertur, onus."
> > > (The burden which is borne well becomes light) - Ovid
> > >
> > > My Yahoo page
> > > http://360.yahoo.com/minervalis_barnowl
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Fausta Martiana Gangalia Minervalis
>
> "Leve fit, quod bene fertur, onus."
> (The burden which is borne well becomes light) - Ovid
>
> My Yahoo page
> http://360.yahoo.com/minervalis_barnowl
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salve, illustrious consul,

I thank a lot the support.

I´m very glad BOTH consules this year have supported me.

I agree dearly with all kind words you have said about Piscinus as well.

Valete bene in pacem deorum,
L. Arminius Faustus

FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!

CONSULS

I will cast stones at the cista for Marcus Moravius Piscinus
Horatianus and Lucius Arminius Faustus.

Piscinus offers much administrative experience, knowledge of Roman
law, and his religious resource and dedication are tough to find
*anywhere* much less NR. He has served well as Tribune, as I expected
he would. He looks at issues from all sides before making a final
decision, and that is to be commended. And you will receive a
decision..one that is well contemplated. I have no doubt he will make
an excellent Consul.

I am especially impressed with the frankness of Faustus, who promises
a year's worth of hard work...not a set of plans which can be
accomplished only within 4 or 5 years. He alluded to a Consulship
being a small part of a large mosaic, and this is so. A year's work
for a year's term. A reasonable promise. Faustus is dedicated to a
realistic restoration of the ancient ways and is dedicated to Minerva,
Ceres, Vesta. He is a compassionate individual who listens to the
concerns of people and will administer the law with the needs of the
citizens in mind, as well as a positive direction for the republic.
He has past magisterial experience also and he would be an asset to
Piscinus.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

"I have been hated by the bad men,
So, for me, it is a sign I am on the right path"

Seneca, on the Happy Life

(my own free translation)

By queen Minerva, my personal devotion, by Ceres Almight, patroness of the
plebeians, and by the holy Vesta, lar of the State.

On this second speech, I will adress you about the power of example. I thank
by the inspiration to the most illustrious Apolonius Cordus, this lighthouse
of knowledge among our ignorance.

I believe the example is the best teacher. If you honour me to elect youir
consul, I´ll make the roman example as my main flag of behaviour.

As aedilis plebis, hardly we have seen someone that honoured so much this
magistrature. Although simple, the Cerealia that year was made with much
care and love.

As tribune, I have followed Canuleius´ path. My former colleagues knows
well, as they already stated on this list, I was a daring tribune. But
instead of using Sainctitas to protect citizens, I prefered to use arguments
and speeches.

However, I have worked very well with Consul - that times illustrious consul
Marinus - to write common laws. A law made by the hands of a consul and
tribune, Imperium and Tribunitia Potestas, is really an example. These are
the highest powers on the Republic. No one could have both at the same
times. Expect Augustus, but when he really achieved that, the Republic was
over.

As praetor, the adherence to roman ways was my leading goal. The main list
was moderated with soft - and unperceptible hands. By sharing with the
apparitores this burden, keeping it was soft... and democratic. Even when,
pressed by changes on personal life, I wasnt able to be so active like I
would desire.

It is not against the Cursus Honourum I want to be consul. The cursus
honorum of the plebeians was fullfilled: Tribune and Aedilis. The curule
cursus is on its right path. I was quaestor, I was praetor. Voting on
Faustus is a sign NR wants more roman uses on it. And the cursus honourm is
really the training of our leaders. By voting in me, you will have certain
you will be choosing the roman thing to do.

Not only on overall NR politics I am working, but I was also propraetor of
Brasilia. I invoke the testimony of the citizens of Brazil about my rule. I
accepted the office and... when time came, that a new citizen (illustrious
beloved by the gods Arminius Reccanellus) asked the propraetorship, I
handled him immediatelly. Because I BELIEVE NEW CITIZENS MUST RAISE THE
CURSUS HONORUM. Reccanellus had the trainning necessary I gave him as
apparitor of the provincia. And as you could see by the praised of
illustrious consul Strabo to him here, my training wasn´t in vain. If I can
take a pride on the work of my colleagues, if I coudln´t teach something to
him, I had some merit on identifying him as a valuable citizen to this
republic. If as governor, I hadn´t challenge him to grow on the Republic
service, NR wouldn´t have such bright citizen, at side of Senator Arminius
Maior, one of the two lights of this province.

This example I have always struggled to bear, I will apply even more on the
consulship, if you honour me with your votes, and the gods keep me healthy.

Vote on Faustus not moved by some craft speech, but by my personal history.
What I say now, is what I have been saying all times. My History on NR is
the public compromise I show to you.

Valete bene in pacem deorum,
L. Arminius Faustus

FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> A. Tullia Scholastica M. Iulio Severo quiritibus S.P.D.
>
>
>
> Salvete omnes,
>
> Aula Tullia Scholastica has been active in Nova Roma as a Rogatrix,
> Scribe, Accensus, Interpreter, and Coryphaea in the Sodalitas Musarum.
> She is brilliant, resourceful, cultivated and a wonderful friend. I don¹t
> know many Nova Romans who could match her devotion and dedication to our
> Republic. Somebody just wrote that Nova Roma has a hidden treasure in
> Scholastica, and I agree. She will be a superb Praetor.
>
> ATS: Thank you very much for your kind words. You and I are both well
> acquainted with the work in the censor¹s office, where we toil unseen by any
> but the censor, the scribae, and the tirones; you have been a fine and
> hardworking colleague there, which we all appreciate.
>
>
> I also believe that Titus Iulius Sabinus is an excellent choice for the
> Praetorship.
>
> I'll vote for the them, and I urge all Nova Romans to do so, in the best
> interests of our Republic.
>
> Valete optime,
>
> M€IVL€SEVERVS
>
> PROPRÆTOR€PROVINCIƀMEXICO
> ROGATOR
> INTERPRETER
> SCRIBA€CENSORIS€GEM
> MVSÆVS€COLLEGII€ERATOVS€SODALITATIS€MVSARVM
> SOCIVS€CHORI€MVSARVM

Vale et valete quam optime,

A. Tullia Scholastica



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

M. Hortensia Quiritibus spd;
and this is why I ask the quirites and especially the
plebeians to vote for L. Arminius Faustus; for his good work for
Nova Roma, for his understanding of the ways of Roma Antiqua, for
his following the cursus honorum. A true inspiring leader.
Also for his calm & wisdom; he villifies no one; he is known
for his good wisdom, always quoting from the ancients to help us
find the right way. To me he is really the finest example of
Romanitas!

And with him as consul M. Moravius Pisicinus, wise & learned, flamen
Carmentalis, moderate, a longtime civis of Nova Roma who has
survived the difficult past & returned to do even more.

For praetores; T. Iulius Sabinus & after much thought C. Equitius
Cato, sometime Cato is so hard-headed! But he is devoted to Nova
Roma.

A. Tullia Scholastica if a fine Latinist & scholar, and this is why
I expect more from her in service to the state. She has never been
Questrix or Curule Aedile or Propraetrix. I say this, myself
observing the ancient rule & taking the year off to avoid
continuatio. I wanted to last year but was asked to run for plebeian
aedile as there was no one.

G. Fabius Buteo Modianus is running for censor. He has tried this
year to do so much - too much! It's very hard to be Consul as he and
Pompeia Minucia Strabo, another good friend can attest. But from the
best will in the world. I know his heart & his activity as a pontiff
inspires me & everyone else. He is a wonderful person & will make a
fine & prudent Censor.

bene valete in pacem deorum
Marca Hortensia Maior, aedilis plebis
producer "Vox Romana" Podcast




- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Lucius Arminius Faustus"
<lafaustus@...> wrote:

>
> "I have been hated by the bad men,
> So, for me, it is a sign I am on the right path"
>
> Seneca, on the Happy Life
>
> (my own free translation)
>
> By queen Minerva, my personal devotion, by Ceres Almight,

patroness of the

> plebeians, and by the holy Vesta, lar of the State.
>
> On this second speech, I will adress you about the power of

example. I thank

> by the inspiration to the most illustrious Apolonius Cordus, this

lighthouse

> of knowledge among our ignorance.
>
> I believe the example is the best teacher. If you honour me to

elect youir

> consul, I´ll make the roman example as my main flag of behaviour.
>
> As aedilis plebis, hardly we have seen someone that honoured so

much this

> magistrature. Although simple, the Cerealia that year was made

with much

> care and love.
>
> As tribune, I have followed Canuleius´ path. My former colleagues

knows

> well, as they already stated on this list, I was a daring tribune.

But

> instead of using Sainctitas to protect citizens, I prefered to use

arguments

> and speeches.
>
> However, I have worked very well with Consul - that times

illustrious consul

> Marinus - to write common laws. A law made by the hands of a

consul and

> tribune, Imperium and Tribunitia Potestas, is really an example.

These are

> the highest powers on the Republic. No one could have both at the

same

> times. Expect Augustus, but when he really achieved that, the

Republic was

> over.
>
> As praetor, the adherence to roman ways was my leading goal. The

main list

> was moderated with soft - and unperceptible hands. By sharing with

the

> apparitores this burden, keeping it was soft... and democratic.

Even when,

> pressed by changes on personal life, I wasnt able to be so active

like I

> would desire.
>
> It is not against the Cursus Honourum I want to be consul. The

cursus

> honorum of the plebeians was fullfilled: Tribune and Aedilis. The

curule

> cursus is on its right path. I was quaestor, I was praetor. Voting

on

> Faustus is a sign NR wants more roman uses on it. And the cursus

honourm is

> really the training of our leaders. By voting in me, you will have

certain

> you will be choosing the roman thing to do.
>
> Not only on overall NR politics I am working, but I was also

propraetor of

> Brasilia. I invoke the testimony of the citizens of Brazil about

my rule. I

> accepted the office and... when time came, that a new citizen

(illustrious

> beloved by the gods Arminius Reccanellus) asked the

propraetorship, I

> handled him immediatelly. Because I BELIEVE NEW CITIZENS MUST

RAISE THE

> CURSUS HONORUM. Reccanellus had the trainning necessary I gave him

as

> apparitor of the provincia. And as you could see by the praised of
> illustrious consul Strabo to him here, my training wasn´t in vain.

If I can

> take a pride on the work of my colleagues, if I coudln´t teach

something to

> him, I had some merit on identifying him as a valuable citizen to

this

> republic. If as governor, I hadn´t challenge him to grow on the

Republic

> service, NR wouldn´t have such bright citizen, at side of Senator

Arminius

> Maior, one of the two lights of this province.
>
> This example I have always struggled to bear, I will apply even

more on the

> consulship, if you honour me with your votes, and the gods keep me

healthy.

>
> Vote on Faustus not moved by some craft speech, but by my personal

history.

> What I say now, is what I have been saying all times. My History

on NR is

> the public compromise I show to you.
>
> Valete bene in pacem deorum,
> L. Arminius Faustus
>
> FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
> FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
> FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
> FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
> FAUSTUS FOR CONSUL!
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

> Salve, T. Iuli Sabine, et salvete, quirites!
>
>
>
> SALVE ET SALVETE !
>
> You have the same respect from my part, Magistra Scholastica. We
> done great things together and my job from this year represent the
> contribution of my Cohort (the first Pia Fidelis in NR), without
> doubts. There you weren't involved only in the games sections. You
> were an historical and juridical advisor, too. Thank you.
>
>
> ATS: Thank you very much for your kind words as well. I have enjoyed
> working with (and for) you in the aedilician cohors this year; we have a good
> and dedicated group there who have worked together to present the ludi, deal
> with the Magna Mater project, and all the other matters which fall under the
> purview of the curule aediles.
>
> VALE ET VALETE,
> IVL SABINVS
>
> Vale et valete,
>
> A. Tullia Scholastica
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com> , "A.
> Tullia Scholastica"
> <fororom@...> wrote:
>>> > > ATS: Let me add that T. Iulius Sabinus has worked very,
> very hard as aedilis curulis, something I know firsthand from being
> in his cohors. He is not one to cut and run when the going gets
> rough, or one to lose his temper.
>>> > > He has done a wonderful job almost singlehandedly, and I trust
> that the citizenry enjoyed all of the ludi he superintended.
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]